Expt 3.docx

Experiment 03 Effect of Chunking on Short Term Memory Abstract: The objective of the experiment was to study the effect of chunking on short term memory in for recalling words. Chunking refers to breaking down large piece of information into smaller units to remember them. Chunking is one of the technique used to store information in the short term memory. For this purpose, 37 students from MA1 Psychology were selected as samples for the experiment. Two group randomized between group design was used for the sample selection of each group. The two groups were non chunking and chunking group. The task for both the groups was same: the subjects were given a list of words, in which they were to memorize the words in 1 minute and recall as many words as they can in 1 minute. Independent large sample t test was used to analyze the data. The results indicate that there is no significant difference in the number of correct word recall between chunking and non chunking group. Also, there was no significant difference between the means of both the groups, which means that chunking does not help significantly in recall. Keywords: short term memory, chunking and non-chunking.

Problem statement: To study the effect of chunking on memory. (effect on short term memory)

Introduction: 1) Memory: Menory is the means by which we draw on our past experiences in order to use this information in the present' (Sternberg, 1999). Memory is the term given to the structures and processes involved in the storage and subsequent retrieval of information.Memory is essential to all our lives. Memory involves three processes: a) encoding- getting the sensory information in a form that the brain can use; b) storageholding on to the information for some period of time; c) retrieval- getting the information that is in storage into a form that can be used.

2) Short Term Memory: Short Term Memory (STM) is the second stage of the multi store memory model proposed by the Atkinson & Shiffrin (1971). The duration of STM is between 15 and 30 seconds, and the capacity about 7 items. Short term memory has three key aspects: 

Limited capacity- only about 7 items can be stored at a time.



Limited duration- storage is very fragile and information can be lost with distraction or passage of time.



Encoding- primarily acoustic, even translating visual information into sounds. The magic number 7 (plus or minus two) by Miller (1956) provides evidence for the capacity of short term memory. According to his theory, most individuals can store between 5 and 9 items in their short term memory. Though the duration is roughly 15-30 seconds in STM, the information can be kept for a longer time in STM by repeating them verbally (acoustic encoding), a process known as maintenance rehearsal. Peterson & Peterson (1959) in their study showed that the longer the delay, the less information is recalled. The rapid loss of information from memory is taken as an indication of short term memory having a limited duration.

3) Chunking:

Chunking is a process by which individual pieces of information are

bound together into a meaningful whole. A chunk is defined as a familiar collection of more elementary units that have been inter- associated and stored in memory repeatedly and act as a coherent, integrated group when retrieved. The size of the chunks generally range from anywhere from two to six items. Miller (1956) noted that it is possible to increase short term memory for high information content items effectively by mentally recoding them into smaller units or number. The phenomenon of chunking as a memory mechanism can be observed in the way individuals’ group numbers and information in day to day life. While recalling a mobile phone number such as 9849523450, we might break this into 98 495 234 50. Thus, we are remembering four groups of numbers. The groups produced have meaning to the participant, so this strategy makes it easier for an individual to recall and maintain information in memory during studies and testing. Thus, one can expect a higher proportion of correct recall.

Review of literature Huntley et al. (2011) did a study on working memory task performance and chunking in early Alzheimer’s disease. People with mild Alzheimer’s disease (n=28) were selected and divided into mild and very mild disease groups according to mini mental status examination. A control group of 15 elderly people were also selected. All participants performed digit and spatial working memory tasks requiring either unstructured sequences or structures sequences, which encourage chunking of information, to be recalled. The results showed that the control group and both disease groups performed significantly better on structured trials of the digit working memory tasks, indicating successful use of chunking strategies to improve verbal working memory performance. The control group and very mild disease groups also performed significantly better on structured trials of the spatial task, whereas those with mild disease demonstrated no significant difference between the structured and unstructured spatial conditions. Bor, D. (2012). The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for Meaning. New York: Basic Books. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 97–185. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97. George Miller's The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information (1956) has shown that the probability of recall is greater when the "chunking" strategy is used. The grouping of the responses occurs as individuals place them into categories according to their inter-relatedness based on semantic and perceptual properties. Lindley (1966) showed that the groups produced have meaning to the participant, therefore; this strategy makes it easier for an individual to recall and maintain information in memory during studies and testing. Therefore, when "chunking" is used as a strategy, one can expect a higher proportion of correct recalls

Rationale: This experiment was carried out to check whether the chunking group correctly recalls more number of words than non chunking group. Also, as the experiment requires giving the participants related words to chunking group and non related words to non chunking group, the objective was to see whether there is better recall for related words than non related words. Not only these, participants of past studies have been adults, so this experiment was done on students to explore a new age group.

Method I.

Materials: 1) Two test sheets were used- each sheet for each group i.e. one for chunking group, and one for non chunking group.

2) Stopwatch 3) Paper pen- pencil

II.

Experimental Design: The objective of the experiment is to study the effect of chunking and non chunking on short term memory. For this purpose, two group randomized between group design will be used for the sample selection of each group. The two groups will be named as non chunking and chunking group. The task for both the groups will be same: the subjects will be given a list of words, in which they have to memorize the words in 1 minute and recall as many words as they can in 1 minute. After entering the data, independent large sample t test will be used to analyze to check if the number of correct word recall is more in chunking group compared to non chunking group.

III.

Variables: 1) Independent variable: Type of test given to chunking group and to non-chunking group 2) Dependent variable: number of correct word recall of both the groups. 3) Control variablesi.

Single blind experimental design is to be used where the subjects are not aware about the purpose and objective of the experiment.

ii.

Students should be randomly divided into two groups to control bias, previous knowledge or experience.

iii.

Time given for recall is to be same i.e. 1 minute and method of recall is also to be same i.e. free recall.

iv.

The total number of words in both the conditions should same i.e. 20 words.

v.

Environmental factors like light, temperature, noise, etc. should be kept under control.

IV.

Hypothesis The number of correct word recall will be significantly more in chunking group compared to the non chunking group.

V.

Sample Total 37 students from MA 1 Psychology were selected as samples for the study. As the experiment requires a between group design, the subjects were randomly divided into two groups- 19 subjects in group A and 18 subjects in group B. There was only one male and others were female. Their age of the subjects’ ranged from 21-23 years.

VI.

Statistical Analysis Independent large sample t test was used to analyze the data to find any significant difference in the number of correct word recall between chunking and non chunking group. Independent large sample was used because the experiment had a between group design and the sample size exceeded 30.

The formula for calculating t is as follows: |𝑀1 −𝑀2 |

t=

𝜎𝐷

Procedure 1) Rapport formation The subjects were made comfortable in the place where they were seated. Rapport formation was not difficult as the subjects and the experimenters belonged to the same class. 2) Instructions: following instructions were given to both the groups: “you will be given a list of words. You are supposed to memorize these words in 1 minute. After that, you will have to recall the words as many as you remember in 1 minute. If you are ready, we can begin the experiment.”

3) Actual procedure The objective of the experiment was to study the effect of chunking on short term memory in terms of word recall. Chunking refers to breaking down large piece of information into smaller units in order to remember them. Chunking is one of the strategies used to store information in the short term memory. For this purpose, 37 students from MA1 Psychology were selected as samples for the experiment. Two group randomized between group design was used for the sample selection of each group. The two groups were non chunking and chunking group. The task for both the groups was same: the subjects were given a list of words, in which they were to memorize the words in 1 minute and recall as many words as they can in 1 minute. Independent large sample t test was used to analyze the data to check if the number of correct word recall is more in chunking group compared to non chunking group.

Results: Qualitative result: As attached in the record sheet. Introspective analysis: For non chunking group: the subjects did not find it difficult to recall the words as they used several techniques like association, making story, making pairs, etc. For chunking group: the subjects found it easy to recall the words as they reported using grouping techniques in which they could make groups in which there were 5 elements. Other than the grouping technique, they used association technique.

Quantitative result X1

X2

x1

x12

x2

x22

14

18

1.21

3.61

1.46

13.03

9

12

-3.79

2.39

14.36

5.71

15

18

2.21

3.61

4.88

13.03

11

17

-1.79

2.61

3.20

6.81

11

16

-1.79

1.61

3.20

2.59

10

13

-2.79

-1.39

7.78

1.93

15

11

2.21

-3.39

4.88

11.49

13

15

0.21

0.61

0.04

0.37

17

12

4.21

2.39

17.72

5.71

15

16

2.21

1.61

4.88

2.59

10

18

-2.79

3.61

7.78

13.03

13

15

0.21

0.61

0.04

0.37

14

18

1.21

3.61

1.46

13.03

7

13

-5.79

-1.39

33.52

1.93

12

11

-0.79

-3.39

0.62

11.49

18

11

5.21

-3.39

27.14

11.49

15

10

2.21

-4.39

4.88

19.27

9

15

-3.79

0.61

14.36

0.37

2.21

-

4.88

-

15

-

X1= 243

Σ

X2= 259

157.08

𝑀1 = 𝑀2 =

∑𝑋 𝑁 ∑𝑋 𝑁

𝜎1 = √

= =

∑ 𝑥2 𝑁

243 19 259 18

=√

= 12.79

= 14.39 157.08 19

= √8.267 = 2.88

x12= Σ 134.24

x22=

𝜎2 = √

𝜎𝐷 = √

∑ 𝑥2

=√

𝑁

(𝜎1 )2 𝑁1

134.24 18

= √7.457 = 2.73

(𝜎2 )2

+

𝑁2

=√

(2.88)2 19

=√ =√

+

(2.73)2 18

149.22+141.55 342 290.77 342

=√0.85 = 0.92

|𝑀1 −𝑀2 |

t=

𝜎𝐷

= =

|12.79−14.39| 0.92 1.60 0.92

t = 1.74 df = (𝑁1 -1) +(𝑁2 -1) = (19-1) + (18-1) = 18+17 = 35

when df is 35, (0.05 = 2.03) (0.01= 2.72)

The obtained value of t is smaller than the value at 0.01 as well as 0.05 levels. Thus, the t test shows that there is no significant difference in the number of correct word recall between the chunking and non chunking group (t (35) = 1.74, P>0.05). Also, the means of both the groups does not differ significantly. This means that chunking group does not help significantly in recalling.

Discussion The objective of the experiment was to study the effect of chunking on short term memory in terms of word recall. Chunking refers to breaking down large piece of information into smaller units in order to remember them. Chunking is one of the strategies used to store information in the short term memory. For this purpose, 37 students from MA1 Psychology were selected as samples for the experiment. Two group randomized between group design was used for the sample selection of each group. The two groups were non chunking and chunking group. The task for both the groups was same: the subjects were given a list of words, in which they were to memorize the words in 1 minute and recall as many words as they can in 1 minute. Independent large sample t test was used to analyze the data to check if the number of correct word recall is more in chunking group compared to non chunking group. The hypothesis assumes that the number of correct word recall will be significantly more in chunking compared to non chunking group. The results indicate that there is no significant difference in the number of correct word recall between chunking and non chunking group. Also, there was no significant difference between the means of both the groups, which means that chunking does not help significantly in recall. Huntley et al. in their study (2011) found that the control group and both disease groups performed significantly better on structured trials of the digit working memory tasks, indicating successful use of chunking strategies to improve verbal working memory performance. Thus, the hypothesis is rejected.

Limitation 

There was no equal number of male and female because there was only 1 male and 36 females.

Implications The technique of chunking is one of learning technique, it is specially applied by students, in their initial classes. They should be taught this strategy to remember large pieces of information. This will enhance their ability to recognize and differentiate concept, and identifying similar things and putting them one under one group. Teachers can also recommend breaking the topics based on its length and difficulty, enhance their reading ability and comprehension. Teachers can give them long paragraphs to read and help them

identify the various concepts in that paragraph, thus dividing the long paragraph into meaningful units. Also, for teaching new words to children, not in isolation, but in phrases or sentences, so that children are clearer with the meaning of words when it is accompanied by phrases or sentences. Other than a help for learners in educational settings, chunking as an easy strategy is used in other areas of daily life: in remembering numbers, birthdates, pronouncing a long word which is difficult to spell out, categorizing while making lists (ex: shopping list), etc. The chunking strategy is used for motor learning also, ex: steps for dancing, learning a song, learning an instrument, etc.

Conclusion Chunking group and non-chunking group showed no significant difference in the number of correct recall.

References Atkinson, R., & Shiffrin, R. (1971). The control processes of short term memory. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences : Stanford University. Baddeley, A. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly journal of experimental psychology , 49 (A), 5-28. Baddeley, A. (2003). Working Memory: Looking back and looking visual forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 4 (10), 829-839. Casteel, C. A. (1988). Effects of Chunked Reading among Learning Disabled Students: An Experimental Comparison of Computer and Traditional Chunked Passages. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 17 (2). Ciccarelli, S., & Meyer, G. (2006). Psychology. United States: Pearson Education. Colan, R. (2017, September 18th). Chunking (Psychology). Retrieved November 3rd, 2017, from Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_(psychology) Huntley, J., Bor, D., & Adam Hampire, A. O. (2011). Working memory task performance and chunking in early alzheimer's disease. British Journal of Psychiatry , 198 (5), 398-403. Lindley, R. (1966). Recording as a function of chunking and meaningfulness. Psychonomic Science , 6, 393-394. McLeod, S. A. (2009). Short term memory. Retrieved November 3rd, 2017, from Simply Psychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/short-term-memory.html

Miller, G. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review , 63, 81-97. Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2003). Human Memory. (M. Taflinger, Ed.) Canada: Vicki Knight. Peterson, L., & Peterson, M. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of experimental psychology , 58 (3), 193-198. Sakai, K., Kitaguchi, K., & Hikosaka, O. (2003). Chunking during human visuomotor sequence learning. Experimental Brain Research , 152 (2), 229-242. Tulving, E., & Craik, F. (2000). The Oxford handbook of memory. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Appendix As attached with the record sheet.