A6PS112 Cognitive Psychology 1

We guarantee an original paper free from Plagiarism.

Order a Similar Paper Order Different Paper

We got you covered for the whole semester.


Table of Contents

Assessment Task

The CA requires students submit a report on a research experiment.

The experiment involved students participating in a memory test that included retroactive interference.


Organise the contents of your report in a structured manner

Key literature on the topic

Use the existing literature to identify suitable hypotheses



Cognitive psychology is a branch within psychology that deals specifically with mental processes like attention, learning and memory.

Cognitive psychology considers memory to be one of its most important components (Neisser (2014)

Short term memory refers to a portion of memory that is limited in its ability to hold information in the active mind, but not be able manipulate it.

The sequence of events in the brain that encode memories can be used to recall them (Baesalou (2014)).

These memories are also known working memory.

It cannot manipulate or operate the stored data but can decode it if needed immediately.

Proactive interference, a sub-discipline of psychology, is when an individual tries to learn new information on a topic that was previously being learned by him (Ries und al. 2014).

Retroactive interference occurs when someone forgets what they have previously learned and learns new information.

The theory behind interference states that impedance occurs when newly learned information is mixed with previously learned data. This affects exchange between long-term memory and working memory (Wienstein and al., 2014).

This means that although stored data remains in the mind, it can’t be easily recovered due to rivalry from newly obtained data.


This is an example of how to recall memories.

The professor or lecturer called the names of some students for the very first time during a given time.

Participants were required to recall those names and call them out again.

The participants were then asked to recall the names once more to test their ability to recall the information instantly.

Participation in this particular experiment was completed by 70 people, with an average age 26.4.

All participants had completed a full or part-time BA in psychology.

There were 49 total female participants, and 21 total male participants.

The experiment described above is part memory recalling and memory information processing theory.

Information processing theory can be described as an intellectual approach to the study of how data is transformed by human personalities.

The show assumes that data originating from the earth can undergo mental procedures beyond a simple jolt-reaction design.

“Contribution from nature experiences the intellectual frameworks that are then measured by “yield” (Jacoby Wahlheim & Kelley (2015).

Data can be handled in several ways. These include acknowledgment, acknowledgement, acknowledgment, and capability.

The focal official component controls the amount of data being processed, but more primitive tactile ranges within the cerebrum first acknowledge any natural information.

The hypothesis looks at the brain’s reactions to continuously displayed jolts.

The model is used as part of a few research areas such as psychological improvement, neuroscience, and fake intelligence (Kliegl Pastotter & Bauml 2015).

This was done to verify that the mind is a computer that processes data with extraordinary proficiency and great execution in basic thinking. The process was gradually upgraded.

Data Preparing is a term used in Psychological Brain science. It refers to the deep need to verify the Cognitive Load Theory (and Instructional Outline) and is a hypothesis that joins several hypothetical viewpoints that primarily seek to clarify human learning through the improvement of arranged memories structures (Unsworth Brewer & Spillers (2013)).

There are three main functions that go into processing the information.

Sensory Memory, Work Memory, Long-term Memory

The instructional model that concentrates the principles (Verneau, et al. 2015):

The information provided by the environment is focalized in a very consistent way and is processed by a complicated series.

The processed system modifies or alters the data or information that is being gathered in an organized system.

The goal of each research task is to discover brain processes and structures that go beyond cognitive functions.

There are many courses that can be connected to Data Handling within a learning domain.

Learners are constantly learning new skills and using memory forms to store data.

They also have the ability to retrieve the necessary data for the lesson.

Data Preparing, from an educator’s perspective, is used to assist learners to improve their distinct abilities and understand the educational programs.

It is a great way for teachers and instructors to practice the data handling skills of their learners.

This is a skill that focuses on determining a specific situation and establishing the correct way to address it.

This skill focuses on gathering the information. It deals with collecting the specific information or data and preparing questions for clarification.

Recalling the skills refers to the ability to code and recall and then link with the memories.

Organizational skills include the ability to compare, sequence, visualise, and verbally or in any particular symbol representation (Leppink, et al. 2014).

The following are the stages of recalling memories:

Memory Encoding

It is the beginning of the storage.

The information that was collected into the memory system must be changed into a form that the memory can store (Ragland and al., 2016).

Memory Storage

This section of the Memory focuses on the type of memory being stored and how long it will be kept.

The storage of memory can be short term or long term (Pergola, Suchan 2013, 2013).

Memory Retrieval

It’s the process where the stored information are being removed.

Part or all of the memory that is not able to be recalled, or cannot be taken out, gets deleted from the storage (Brandimonte & McDaniel 2014).


This section provides a statistical summary for each memory trial.

The results of the group comparisons will follow.

In order to determine whether memory performance was different between trials 1 through 4, paired samples were used in t-tests.

Table 1.1 lists the mean word recall and standard deviation for the four memory trials. It also shows the number of participants.

The initial results indicate that condition 2 was the most effective.

The highest retention and recall of words was observed in condition 2 (x, SD: 1.33) with an increase of 1.46 words. This is in comparison to condition 1(x).

This indicates that repeated exposures to the first list resulted in increased learning, as evidenced by the higher mean score.

Condition 4 had the lowest mean score (x).

This is evidenced by the loss of 2.03 words in between condition 1 (x?

: 6.16; SD: 1.39) vs. condition 4 (x?).

: 6.16, SD 1.39) and condition 4(x). This indicates the retroactive interference effect that resulted from the inclusion of the second item in condition 3(x).

This effect was further examined.

Condition 1

Condition 2

Condition 3

Condition 4


Table 1.1 Summary statistics on memory recall, including mean, standard deviation and total number of participants in 4 conditions

Memory Performance Differences Across Trials

A series of paired samples and t-tests was performed to determine if memory recall increased after repeated exposure to the first set of words.

Analyzing these results revealed a statistically significant rise in memory recall between conditions 1 and 2. (t(69), = -7.828, P 0.001).

: 6.16; SD: 1.39) vs. condition 2 (x).

: 7.61. SD: 1.33) from 1.46 words.

95% confidence levels show that the population difference between the variables is somewhere between 1.82 and 1.08.

A comparison of the word recall between two conditions (x and y) is also possible.

: 7.61; SD: 1.33) versus condition 4 (x).

: 5.59, SDS: 1.33) and condition 4 (x). A statistical analysis was done which confirmed that the difference of 2.03 words was statistically significant. (t(69). = 11.67; p 0.0.001).

The 95% confidence interval revealed that the population mean differences lie between 1.68 and 2.37.

The word recall of both lists was assessed for each group.

: 6.16; SD: 1.39) vs. group 3 (x).

This analysis revealed no significant difference in total recall (t(69). = 0.923; p > 0.0.05).

Further details can be found in graphs 1.1 to 1.2 and 1.3.

Graph 1.1 showing total world recall for conditions 1 & 2. Standard deviation for conditions 2

* Significant difference at the 0.001% threshold using paired sample t-test.

Graph 1.2: Total world recall and standard deviation of conditions 2 through 4.

* Significant difference at the 0.001% threshold using paired sample t-test.

Graph 1.3: Total world recall and standard deviation in conditions 1 through 3.

No significant differences were found between the mean recall.


Alternative Hypotheses and the Null Hypothesis

Keep in mind that speculation testing is a goal.

Hahn & Ridder (2015). The option theory and invalid speculation can be described in terms of the differences or impacts that occur in the populace.

You will need to use specimen to determine which explanation (i.e. invalid speculation or option theory), is more likely (though one could also test against invalid speculation).

In this way, the option and invalid theories will be reflected in the articulations of all insights obtained by graduate students on administration courses.

The “contentious position of a third party” is what invalid speculation really means.

This means that it assumes that what one is trying to show did not occur. It also indicates that it generally expresses the belief that there is something that breaks even with zero.

Two different showing techniques, for example, did not result in exam exhibitions with different contrast (i.e., no comparison).

Another example is the possibility that tension and athletic execution do not have a connection (i.e., there is zero incline).

Option theory is a way to express the inverse. It’s usually the speculation that one is trying to prove (e.g., two different exhibition techniques led to various exam exhibitions).

You can initially express these theories using more general terms, such as “impact”, relationship, and so forth.

As shown below, for the illustration of the showing strategies.

The way one “condenses” the exam exhibitions will dictate how one should compose a more specific invalid and option speculation.

You could, for example, think about the average exam execution of each gathering.

Evaluation of Hypothesis in terms Of Significance Level

The presumed p-esteem, which is the level of noteworthiness, is frequently communicated.

Depending on the test you have chosen, one can calculate the probability (i.e. the p-esteem), of seeing specimen results (or something more extraordinary) provided that the invalid speculation remains valid.

Another way to express this is to consider whether a difference in mean score (or any other measurement) could have been made in light of the presumption there is no distinction.

This announcement is about our case. It concerns the differences in mean exam execution among two distinct educating methods (Johnson, 2013,).

The invalid theory holds that there is no difference between the two show techniques in the population.

One could get a p value of 0.03, or p =.03.

The invalid theory is valid so there is a chance that you will find a distinction even larger than the one reviewed.

This is a “measurably critical” distinction, however. Gelman & Locken (2014).

If the shot was less than 5% (5 times in 100) and there is a significant difference in the means of exam execution, or any other measurement, one would discard the invalid theory and admit the option theory.

However, if the shot was greater than 5% (5x in at least 100), one might ignore the invalid theory. In that case, one would not acknowledge the possibility speculation.

In that case, the illustration where p=.03 would show us dismissing the invalid theory while acknowledging the option speculation.

This is because at 0.03 importance (which is less than 5%), we can still get the same outcome every now and then. (Kobyashi, et al. 2016,).

Analyzing The Results

Condition 2 has the highest retention value. The mean value of the condition 2 was higher than the one of condition 1, and the deviation value is lower than condition 1.

The facilitation of the initial list is high, as evidenced by the condition2’s high mean score.

Participants are subjected to the memory recall test. However, the exposure of the first word list between conditions 1 & 2 is significantly different as p is lower than 0.001.

The lowest score is condition 4.

This indicates that the retention rate of memory recall decreases significantly by 2.03 word between condition 1 and 2.

This means that it is retroactively interfered with and the introduction of a second list is recommended.

The introduction of second lists revealed that condition 3 has a mean value greater than condition 4.

The difference in the value of condition2 and condition4 shows that there is marginal significance, with p within 0.5 and 0.01.

The average values for condition 1 and condition 3 were 6.16, 5.93 respectively.

The p value is higher than 0.1, so there is no significant difference between conditions 1 and 3.

Refer to

Cognitive psychology: An overview to cognitive scientists.

Psychology Press.

Theory and applications of prospective memories.

Psychology Press.

The Statistical Crisis in Science Datadependent Analysis–a “garden on forking paths”, explains why so many statistically significant comparisions don’t hold.

Am Sci, 102.6, p.460.

Non-standard testing through a composite of null and an alternative in point identified parameters.

Journal of Econometric Methods. 4(1). pp.1-28.

Memory consequences of looking back in order to notice change: Retroactive or proactive facilitation.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41(5), 1282.

Revised standards for statistical proof.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (110(48), pp. 19313-19317

The role of encoding/retrieval in proactive interference.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory and Cognition, 41(6), 1778.

Revascularization with functionally complete coronary revascularization: The prognostic significance of residual coronary Stenoses.

Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Comparison of two problems or examples can have an impact on task performance, cognitive load and task performance.

Learning and Instruction 30, 32-42

Cognitive psychology: Classic edition.

Psychology Press.

Associative learning beyond its medial temporal brain: Many actors on stage.

Frontiers of behavioral neuroscience, 7, 162.

Functional and neuroanatomical characteristics of episodic memory impairment in schizophrenia: An fMRI analysis of the item-specific encoding task.

Resolving proactive interference to working memory is also crucial for the white matter pathways that are essential for language.

In Front.


Focusing the search. Retroactive and proactive interference. The dynamics of free recall.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(6), 1742.

Retroactive and proactive transfer of middle-aged people in a sequential motor learning task.

The role and importance of test expectancy in the formation of proactive interference in memory.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 4(4), 1039.

Hello, this question is here because we've worked on this and other similar assignments. If you don't know the answer, you can ask us for help. We guarantee an original paper free from Plagiarism.

Order a Similar Paper Order Different Paper

You can trust us with any of your assignments. We got you covered for the whole semester. We dedicate one writer to do all your assignments