What does it mean for the theories under question? Have people done work on this area since the publication of Richards et al. (1998)?

The lab report must follow the APA format (American Psychological Assoc.)

1. Title of Lab Report: Schema Driven Memory experiment

• The title must consist of the independent variable and dependent variable

2. Abstract: Must be a brief summary of each section of the lab report

2.1 Introduction:

• Background information: Schema experiment – (briefly discuss other schema experiments such as with coins
• Previous theory
• Rational
• Hypotheses

2.2 Method:

• Experimental Design
• Participants:
• Stimuli/Materials
• Procedure

2.2 Results:

• Summary of results
• Relation to hypotheses/previous theory
• Limitation/Alternative explanation
• Conclusion

2.3 Discussion

• Summary of findings
• Limitations and solutions
• Further research
• Conclusion

 

3. Introduction

• What is the general area of interest?
• What does the relevant theory suggest?
• What evidence do they have to support it?
• State what is the open question and the rationale? Now address this.
• What are the experimental predictions/hypotheses?

4. Method

• What is the design? What are the independent variables and the levels?
• Who are the participants? What is the dependant variable?
• What material/stimuli were used?
• What was the procedure? Write a list of events experienced by the participant (include timings). How long does each participant take to do the experiment?

 

5. Results

• Descriptive statistics: Reporting
• Descriptive statistics: Graphs/Tables
• Inferential: Choice of statistical test (Chi-square) & justification i.e. nominal data (categorical)
• Inferential: Reporting statistical test

1. What does the mean scores indicate?
2. What language is used to refer to the graph?
3. Give a justification of the type of test being used?
4. What is the difference between the means statistically significant?
5. What is the significance of the results?
6. There is a relationship between experimental conditions and ability to represent the number four correctly on the drawing (e.g., IV vs IIII)

 

6. Discussion

• Summary of findings
• Implications for open questions, and theoretical/empirical background.
• Do the results support the hypotheses? If not, were there any factors that could have affected participant performance on the experiment?
• Can you think of any other explanations for the results?
• What are the limitations?
• Can you think of other ways of testing schema theory?
• What are the possible solutions to the above limitations?
• Further Research (future research)
• Conclusion

1. Did the findings support the hypotheses?
2. What does it mean for the theories under question?
3. Have people done work on this area since the publication of Richards et al. (1998)?

 

7. References
8. Baddeley, A. (1990). Human Memory: Theory and Practice. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (See pages 335-347.)
9. French, C. C. Richards, A. (1993). Clock this! An everyday example of a schema-driven error in memory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 249-253.
10. Morris, P. E. (1988). Expertise and everyday memory. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Sykes (Eds.) Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues, Vol 1. Chichester: Wiley.
11. Nickerson, R. S. & Adams, M. J. (1982). Long-term memory for a common object. In U. Neisser (Ed.) Memory observed: Remembering in natural contexts. San Francisco: Freeman.
12. Richards, A., French, C.C., & Harris, P.R. (1996). Does clock-watching make you clockwise. Memory, 4, 49-58.
13. Richards, A., French, C.C., & Harris, P.R. (1998). Mistakes around the clock: Errors in memory for the orientation of numerals. The Journal of Psychology, 132, 42-46.