Levels Of Processing

1. Levels Of Processing Structural, Phonological, Semantic

2. Craik and Lockhart (1972) • Proposed an alternative to structural models of memory, focussing instead on memory processes. They suggested that information can be processed at different levels, and that the way in which memory is processed can affect the likelihood of it being retrieved in the future.

3. Depth of encoding • Depending on what we do with information at the time of encoding, processing can be shallow and superficial, or deeper and more meaningful. Craik and Lockhart argued that deeper levels of processing result in more long lasting and more retrievable memories, whereas shallow levels of processing result in memories that are less long-lasting and less likely to be retrieved.

4. Tasks that require different levels of processing. BOY Structural: Is this word in capital letters? Phonological: Does this word rhyme with Toy? Semantic: Does this word fit in the following sentence? The ______ ran ahead of the group.

5. Tasks explained • In the first task it is simply necessary to process the word structurally, scanning the word visually. To complete the second task it is necessary to carry out sound based processing, mentally sounding out the word. To complete the third task it is necessary to think about the meaning of the word and relating it to the rest of the sentence, or put it into a meaningful category.

6. Tasks explained continued • Craik and Lockhart’s theory would predict that words which are processed for meaning (deep processing) will be remembered better than words processed for sound (intermediate processing) which in turn will be recalled better than words which are processed for superficial characteristics such as shape, size or colour (shallow processing).

7. Study Aim Craik and Tulving (1975) investigated the effects of different types of processing on the recall of words. Method Participants were shown 60 words, one at a time, and for each word they had to answer one of three questions. These questions were the same as shown earlier in this PPT.

8. Method continued…. Participants heard each question and then were shown the corresponding word for a brief period. Participants then answered the question. When the 60 questions had been answered, participants were given a recognition test. They were shown a list of 180 words and had to pick out the original 60 words.

9. Results Approximately 17% of words in the visual question condition were correctly recognised. 37% in the auditory question condition, and 65% in the semantic question condition. Conclusion The findings confirmed Craik and Lockhart’s theory about depth of processing: that the type of processing which takes place when information is encoded affects later recall.

10. Types of research • This is referred to as an incidental learning technique task because the participants did not know that they would be required to recall the original words at the end of the procedure. • Although they emphasise process rather than structure, Craik and Lockhart do assume the existence of separate STM and LTM systems. However, they see the function of STM in terms of the processes it carries out.

11. Evaluation • Craik and Lockhart’s (1972) theory provided a realistic and credible alternative to the structural approach to memory. • They emphasised how processes which occur during learning affect the extent to which material can be retrieved from LTM (Medin et al, 2001)

12. Evaluation • The theory would explain why some things, for example deeply significant and meaningful events, can be readily remembered without rehearsal. • The theory also explains why elaborative rehearsal is more effective than maintenance or auditory (Craik and Watkins, 1973). Elaborative rehearsal involves elaboration of the material to be recalled, perhaps by weaving a list of words into a story.

13. Evaluation • Maintenance or rote rehearsal is simply repeating the information over and over. Since elaborative rehearsal involves thinking about the meaning of the material, it is a deeper level of processing and therefore leads to better recall. Elaborative rehearsal can add all kinds of extra images, associations and memories to enrich the material which has to be learned, resulting in better recall (Matlin, 2002). Contrast this with the MSM view of rehearsal as simple verbal repitition.

14. Evaluation • A key problem for the theory concerned is the way in which depth of processing was measured. There was no independent way of assessing whether processing was deep or shallow. Determining this relied on a circular definition which argued that if recall was good, then deep processing must have taken place, and if recall was poor, then the processing must have been shallow. However, just because participants were asked to say whether or not a word was in capital letters, it should not be assumed that they did not engage in further deeper processing.

15. Evaluation • Lockhart and Craik (1990) have updated their model in response to criticisms and recent research findings. The basic ideas remain the same, but they accept that their original model was rather oversimplified, and agree that they had not considered retrieval processes in sufficient detail. In addition, Lockhart and Craik (1990) accepted that in some cases shallow processing does not lead to rapid forgetting.