Scribd
Upload
6 views

Experiment 3

Uploaded by

affanimran098
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
6 views

Experiment 3

Uploaded by

affanimran098
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

December 30, 1899

PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTICAM
Experiment #3: Retroactive Inhibition

Submitted to:
Submitted by:
Date of submission:

Institute of Professional Psychology


Bahria University
Karachi.

1
December 30, 1899

Work division:
Introduction by:
Historical background by:
Method and procedure by:

2
December 30, 1899

Experiment #3: RETROACTIVE INHIBITION


Introduction
Definitions:
 Memory
 Retroactive inhibition
Explanation:
 What is memory?
 Three processes of memory
 Diagram (stages of memory)
 Memory types (sensory, short, long)
 Types of long term memory, declarative memory (episodic, semantic), non declarative
(Episodic)
 Theories of forgetting)
Historical background:
 Old research
 Recent research
(Brief the research abstract in your own words)
Problem:
To study the phenomena of retroactive inhibition by means of the experimental method
Hypothesis:
The subject will forget more when he/she spend the time interval between learning and recall in
learning another list.
Independent variable:
The list of nonsense syllables
The interpolated activity i.e. the learning of list B
Dependent variable:
The amount of saving/ retention or forgetting of the first list
The number of re-learning trials
Method and procedure:
1. Particulars of the subject ( name, age, gender, qualification)
2. Material and apparatus:

3
December 30, 1899

List of words, stop watch, pencil, and memory drum


3. Controls
 Syllables should not repeated
 Noise should be avoided with in the room
 difficulty level of each list should be same
 List must be kept hidden from the subject
Procedure: (Explain a bit of control and experimental condition)

 Control condition

Learn list A> rest for 10 minutes> recall list A

 Experimental condition

Learn list B> interpolated activity learn list C>recall List B

Instructions to subject:

“ A series of non sense syllables will be shown to you through a window in the memory
drum. A non sense syllable is a combination of three letters without any meaning. After the list
has been presented once, the syllables will be shown again, but this time your task is to anticipate
each syllable i.e. to spell it out before it appears in the window. You are to spell out the first
syllable before it appears then second and so on through the entire list. We shall continue this
procedure until you have spelled out each syllable correctly on the same trial.”

Introspective report:
 Control condition
 Experimental condition
(Ask your subject which mnemonics was he/she was using to learn)
Hypothesis:
The subject will forget more when he/she spend the time interval between learning and recall in
learning another list.
Proof of hypothesis: whether hypothesis was rejected or proved.
Discussion of the results:
(Tables, comparison of both the conditions, if your hypothesis is proved then add content
from experiment, your views, introspective report for its support and if its rejected than

4
December 30, 1899

explain extraneous variables for it. You can also add researches to support your
hypothesis)
Sample discussion
We have replicated Herman Ebbinghous experiment in class setting to conform the hypothesis
which is “The subject will forget more when he/she spend the time interval between learning and
recall in learning another list”
The design of the experiment used retroactive inhibition in a way that subject was first asked to
learn and recall list A with interval time 10 minutes( control session) then in experimental
condition subject was asked to learn list B in between subject learned list C and then subject had
to recall list B which shows that if subject took more trails in recalling list B than list A( both
lists are of same difficulty level) then there is retroactive inhibition if the situation is opposite
then there is no retroactive inhibition.
We only used one subject in this experiment because we need to know whether there is
retroactive inhibition or not so for that we need to have one subject who’s learning and
relearning pattern should be same in both control and experimental condition due to which we
were able to check retroactive inhibition.
Hypothesis was proven according to my subject. My subject learned List A in more Trials and
time than in learning list B……………………………..
My subject had problem in recalling the list B because according to my subject list C was
interfering in his recall. He was mixing up two lists B and C in recalling.
Conclusion:
Sample conclusion
The calculated result prove the hypothesis that the subject will forget more when he spend time
interval between learning and recall in learning another list my subject showed the same case he
forgot more while recalling list B. After all my subject was good learner but due to frustration
and retroactive interference his learning and recalling of list A in control session was quite faster
than learning and recalling of list B in experimental condition.

References:
Non sense syllables:
 List A
 List B
 List C
Memory Drum/ picture of memory drum

You might also like