Effects of Abstract and Concrete Total Recall on Undergraduate Students - Research Paper Example

Effects of Abstract and Concrete Total Recall on Undergraduate Students Abstract Numerous studies on the concreteness effect of words that is better memory when it comes to concrete as compared to abstract words indicate that this is a complex phenomenon (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). The aim of this experiment was to determine the effects that concrete and abstract words had on total recall among participants. Eleven participants were asked to read two lists of words; one with concrete words and the other with abstract. Thereafter, a recall test was administered in which the participants were asked to write down all the words they recalled in a single sheet of paper. The result was such that, the difference in recall between concrete and abstract words was statistically significant. The recall records were then scored and a t test was carried out. The recall of concrete words was found to be superior to that of abstract words. Keywords: Concrete words, abstract words, dual coding theory, schema theory, total recall, context availability model Introduction Reading is a term used to refer to the action through which written text is perceived with the aim of comprehending its meaning (Sadoski, 2004). Sadoski (2004) explains further that there are at least two factors that are involved in reading; the written text and a mental action. The written text can either prove to be easy or difficult for the reader but is independent of the same reader (Sadoski, 2004). Factors inherent to the text and those inherent to the text influence reading (Sadoski, 2004). In-text factors include the topic of the text and its content, the text’s readability and the type of text while factors inherent to the mental process are those approaches used to decipher the meaning of text. Through the decades, psychologists have theorized and developed models for the mental process that are involved in reading and comprehension of text (Sadoski, 2004). These include but are not limited to the top down theory of word processing, the bottom up theory, the interactive model and the connectionist model. Literatures from different studies have reported on the aspects involved in reading and understanding. Some studies have focused on features that are text related and others have focused on the features related to the reader (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). This study is however concerned with concrete and abstract nature of words and how these affect total recall. Herrell and Jordan (2002) explain that the level of concreteness of the meaning of a word has been shown to influence its comprehension. This means that those words that refer to concepts that are considered concrete like chair, bus or chalk are processed in the brain much faster and with more accuracy than those words that refer to concepts that are abstract in nature like hope, love and peace (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). This concept is referred to as concreteness or the concrete effect of a word (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). Several studies have in the past observed this effect. Unfortunately, the reason for this concept is yet to be fully understood. However two theories in competition claim to have identified the source of the mentioned effect. These are Dual Coding Theory hereinafter referred to as DCT proposed by Paivio and the Context Availability Model hereinafter referred to as CAM proposed by Schwaneflugel (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). Dual Coding Theory (DCT) Allan Paivio developed this theory in 1971 in his attempt of explaining the powerful mnemonic effects that characterize imagery (Paivio, 1971). Paivio (1971) proposed that in humans, memory is made up of 2 systems that function independently; verbal or linguistic and image or visual memory systems. That the human mind operates through these mental codes or representations (Paivio, 1971). Imagery is needed in order for the brain to successfully recall verbal memory. Paivio and Sadoski explain that this is because when a word triggers an existing and associated image, there are two distinct but linked memory types that are recorded; one in each of the memory stores that is the visual and verbal stores (2011). Paivio predicts that it is easy for the human mind to process and recall concrete words because they are registered and supported in both the visual and verbal mental stores (Paivio, 1971). Concrete words are better processed compared to abstract words because they are associated with the contextual knowledge in the mind providing more information to the processing system. This is different for abstract words, which are only processed in one of the two mental systems and thus require more contexts to be processed easily. Paivio and Sadoski conclude that the combination of both verbal and image materials when teaching and learning increases the chance of words enhancing the related images improving the processing time, comprehension and recall (2011). Context Available Model (CAM) Proposed by Schwaneflugel, this theory explains that it is easier to put concrete words in context as opposed to abstract words (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). However, the focus is not on the context, but the time it takes to construct the context based on what is already in the memory. This theory does not consider the two separate systems in the mind as does DCT, but comprehension in language is facilitated by the presence of contextual material Turner (2007). Schwanenflugel and Akin (1993) explains that this additional contextual material may originate from the reader’s knowledge stored in their mind or a stimulus. This makes it possible for the reader to relate the concepts in the text. In light of this, readers relate concrete words with the contextual information that they have stored in their semantic memory (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). In processing abstract words, the associations with mental contexts are weaker and hence it takes longer to process such words like honesty, love and peace (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). Therefore, understanding is related to one’s ability to contextualize a linguistic message. When the appropriate context is not accessed, understanding becomes incomplete and representation in the memory is less detailed (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). This means that individuals then find learning, recall and recognition difficult. Other cognitive theories include the schema theory, concept mapping, meaningful learning, and hierarchical retrieval system. Concept Mapping In this theory by Tony Buzan, a map provides insight and aids in recall. This is achieved through the reader understanding the connections between concepts (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). Hierarchical Retrieval System Turner (2007) explains that this model requires the teacher to use organization that is selective to aid in comprehension, recall and retrieval of concepts. Here, the material is presented in order from the most general of the concepts to the most detailed and complex concepts (Turner, 2007). This enables the learner to recall the information attained. Schema theory This theory proposes that it is easy to use knowledge that the reader already has to enhance retention and recall of information (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). For example, in a lecture setting, the professor can use a formula that he had taught in a previous lecture to solve a more complex mathematical problem. Meaningful Learning According to Turner (2007), this theory indicates that in learning new concepts, comprehension, recall and retrieval is enhanced through linking the new and old information. For example, the use of videos displaying a concept like the procedure used to weigh a patient would enhance learning and recall during a lesson in clinical health (Herrell and Jordan, 2002). Empirical studies Sadoski (2004) performed experiments with 221 students in college with the aim of determining how comprehensive, interesting and memorable concrete and abstract words were. The results indicated that the ease with which imagery is perceived or the concreteness is strongly related to comprehension and recall (Sadoski, 2004). In a study aimed at determining whether concreteness effect resulted from retrieval context and not purely from explicit memory test, two experiments were performed to study the intentional memory in concrete and abstract word lists (Singer and Ruddell, 1985). Three retrieval contexts were employed; free recall, implicit word-stem completion and explicit word-stem completion (Singer and Ruddell, 1985). Turner (2007) explains that the concreteness effects were observed in two of the contexts; explicit word stem completion and free recall. H0 – Concrete words are easier to understand and recall than abstract words HA – There is no difference in the total recall between concrete and abstract words Method Participants To perform the experiment, 11 senior undergraduate students whose mean and standard deviation were 16.5 and 9.3 respectively were randomly selected. The group was made up of 3 males and 8 females. Their mean age was 25.18 with a standard deviation of 2.18. These students were assigned to two groups in a manner that ensured the difference between them was not statistically significant. The participants were given gift vouchers with stationery as an incentive to participate in the experiment. Material This experiment required the following; pen, paper, two lists one with 15 concrete words and the other with 15 abstract words, a stopwatch that had been timed at 15 seconds for each list of words, a summary sheet and a screen to project. The words in abstract and concrete lists were similar in complexity and length. Procedure This experiment had three phases; the study, distraction and test of memory. The eleven participants having reported to the psychology laboratory for the experiment was randomly assigned to a desk and chair placed before the projector screen. The participants were randomly assigned to receive either the first or the second set of the stimuli. Instructions were then displayed on the projector screen informing the participants the series of tasks that lied ahead. The experimenter explained to the participants that for their first task, they were to study a series of two word lists. They were also informed that after this task, their memory for these particular words would be tested. Each participant then was instructed to look at the 2 word lists. The order in which these word lists were presented in was random. The type of words (concrete and abstract) was not disclosed to the participants but these were instead labeled list 1 and list 2 each with 15 words. The order in which these word lists were presented in was random. Each participant was then required to silently study a word within 5 second followed by a 5 second interval. Within the 5 second interval, a stimulus word was displayed for 2 seconds and then the screen remained blank for 3 seconds. This was done to ensure that in actuality, visual display of the words was shorter to enhance perception and in doing so increase the encoding of the concepts. This was then followed by the phase testing the participants’ memory or recall. The participants were informed that the next phase would be the completion of a memory test in which they were to write all of the words that they could recall in a single sheet of paper. These sheets of paper were handed in after completion of the experiment for analysis. Results Recall from the memory test was determined using a single coding protocol as described by (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). Each stimulus word was coded “correctly recalled” only in the case where the participant had written the exact word as read (Schwanenflugel and Akin, 1993). For example, chair would be coded “correctly retrieved” if the participant had recorded chair in the sheet of paper. A sample t test that was paired was used to compare the correct recall of both the concrete and abstract words. The differences in recall between the concrete and the abstract word lists were statistically significant at (t(10)=3.53, p=0.005. the recall in the concrete condition (M=7.18, SD=1.47) was found to be superior than the recall in abstract condition (M=5.73, SD=1.10). Discussion This experiment established that the effects of concreteness depended on the context of that retrieval was based on. Concrete texts induced better memory compared to abstract words. This observation was consistent to the results predicted by Paivio’s dual coding theory (Paivio, 1971). The list of concrete and abstract words in use here was from linguistic categories that were unrelated. The results from this experiment corroborate those from the experiment carried by Sadoski and other studies (Paivio and Sadoski, 2011). The ease with which individuals read and recall concrete words has been attributed to the fact that it is easier to process them compared to abstract words (Paivio and Sadoski, 2011). This has been proven in many studies on recall, comprehension of sentences and decision making in lexical. Concrete words have been shown to be superior to abstract words in learning, comprehension and recall processes (Paivio and Sadoski, 2011). The statistical significance in the difference in recall between concrete and abstract word lists was attributed to the concreteness effect (Doest and Semin, 2005). The recall in concrete condition (M=7.18, SD=1.47) showed a higher mean and standard deviation compared to the recall in abstract condition (M=5.73, SD=1.10). The p value from t test (t(10)=3.53, p=0.005) was indicative of the statistical difference in the results. The results of this study supported the Dual Coding Theory as concrete words were superiorly recalled compared to abstract words (Doest and Semin, 2005). Concrete words were better recalled as they were associated with linguistic and the image systems of the brain memory processors (Paivio and Sadoski, 2011). In processing concrete words, both verbal and visual pieces of information are stored in the linguistic and the imagination semantic systems respectively (Doest and Semin, 2005). These two systems are linked and the use of one causes the other to function as well (Paivio and Sadoski, 2011). In this respect, Paivio and Sadoski (2011) explain that a concrete word is first processed in the linguistic system and then the imaginative system. Abstract words on the other hand only activate the linguistic system and there is no image associated with these (Doest and Semin, 2005). References Herrell, A. L., & Jordan, M. (2002). 50 active learning strategies for improving reading comprehension. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall. Doest, L. ., & Semin, G. (January 01, 2005). Retrieval contexts and the concreteness effect: Dissociations in memory for concrete and abstract words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 6, 859-881. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Paivio, A., & Sadoski, M. (January 01, 2011). Lexicons, Contexts, Events, and Images: Commentary on Elman (2009) From the Perspective of Dual Coding Theory. Cognitive Science, 35, 1, 198-209. Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Akin, C. E. (1993). Developmental trends in lexical decisions for abstract and concrete words. Athens, Ga: National Reading Research Center. Sadoski, M. (2004). Conceptual foundations of teaching reading. New York: Guilford Press. Singer, H., & Ruddell, R. B. (1985). Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, Del: International Reading Association. Turner, S. (2007). Learning theories. Chandni Chowk, Delhi: Global Media. Read More