Download Generalisability

Cognitive Approach studies – EVALUATION TABLE
Using GRAVE state whether the evaluation point is a strength or a weakness for the study and explain your point.
Craik and Tulving (1975)
LoP
Godden & Baddeley
Context dependent
forgetting
Generalisability
Refer to target population
and sampling method.
If not representative,
sample cannot be
generalised to the target
population.
(this could be called
population validity) Are
the participants are true
representation of the
general population?
Reliability
If the study is hard to
replicate (do again) then it
cannot be shown to be
reliable. Reliability means
that if a study is done
again the same results are
found.
Application
If findings from a study can
be used to help society in a
real-life application, e.g.
Craik & Tulving’s study
supports the Lop
framework then this
makes the study more
useful, which is an
evaluation point But say how it is useful (to
get a mark)
Validity – Experimental,
Ecological or Population?
Do the participants believe the
research that is taking place? If
a study can be seen to be about
real life then it is more useful
— or if it is not about real life it
is not useful.
Does the experiment measure
what it set out to measure? Is
the IV the only variable that
could affect the DV?
Ethics
A study can be evaluated by
considering how ethical or how
unethical it was- DRIPP C
 Debriefing
 Deception
 Right to Withdraw
 Informed consent
 Protection from harm
 privacy
 Competence
Care needs to be taken in
generalising from this study
because the sample was
limited to 20 students. This
is not a representative
sample of a wider target
population.
The experiment is reliable
because it was conducted
in a controlled lab
environment where the
procedure was
standardised and controls
used.
For example the questions
were presented on a
tachistoscope which meant
the same timing; font; word
size was used for every ppt.
Standardised instructions
were given to ppts too.
Care needs to be taken in
generalising from this study
because the sample was
limited to 18 divers. This is
not a representative sample
of a wider target
population.
This means the experiment
can be replicated which in
turn suggests it is reliable.
The experiment is less
reliable because it was
conducted in a natural
environment where there
were fewer controls.
However the procedure
was standardised and the
The experiment lacks ecological
validity because the task of
answering questions about
words presented on a
tachistoscope is not an everyday
occurrence. However it has
internal (experimental) validity
because of the high level of
control within the experiment.
This insured that the only
variable that could affect the
number of words recalled was
the type of question asked
(structural/phonetic/semantic).
Therefore a relationship
between the IV and DV could be
clearly established.
No harm was caused to ppts,
neither were any of the other
ethical guidelines breached.
Therefore we can assume this
experiment was ethical.
However, the way that
memory works according to
the LOP framework should
be the same for everyone –
this means that we can
generalise from the study to
most other people.
The study is useful because
it supports the LOP
framework devised by Craik
and Lockheart. This
suggests that memory
traces are improved
through elaborative
rehearsal, in other words
sematic (deep level)
processing improves
memory.
This in turn can be used to
offer advice to students
studying for exams. They
should read around the
subject and make up
revision activities that make
the learning meaningful.
The study is useful because
it supports the cue
dependent theory of
forgetting devised by
Tulving. This suggests that
memory traces are
improved through context
On the face of it this study has
ecological validity because it
was conducted in a field
environment. However, the task
of memorising word lists heard
through earphones and then
having to recall them is not an
No harm was caused to ppts,
neither were any of the other
ethical guidelines breached.
Therefore we can assume this
experiment was ethical.
However, ppts were required to
memorise word lists under the
Cognitive Approach studies – EVALUATION TABLE
Using GRAVE state whether the evaluation point is a strength or a weakness for the study and explain your point.
However, the way that
forgetting works according
to the cue dependency
theory (context dependent
forgetting) should be the
same for everyone – this
means that we can
generalise from the study to
the way most people’s
minds work.
Duka (2001) with and
without alcohol at
learning and
retrieval.alcohol/alcohol
was better than
alcohol/no alcohol
Care needs to be taken in
generalising from this study
because the sample was
limited to 48 ppts. This is
not a representative sample
of a wider target
population.
or
Baker (2004) gum,
However, the way that
forgetting works according
to the cue dependency
theory (state dependent
forgetting) should be the
same for everyone – this
means that we can
generalise from the study to
most people.
controls that could be used
were used.
For example the words
were recorded and the
presentation of the words
was at the same rate for
each ppt whether on the
land or under the sea.
This means the experiment
can be replicated which in
turn suggests it is reliable.
However there were
problems controlling the
weather and time of day
but these factors did not
seem to affect the results.
The experiment is reliable
because it was conducted
in a controlled lab
environment where the
procedure was
standardised and controls
used. For example the
quantity of alcohol given to
each ppt was the same, as
was the learning tasks and
time allowed for ppts to
memorise the learning
material.
cues at encoding and
retrieval. This in turn can be
used to offer advice to
schools when organising
rooms for students sitting
exams. They should
consider making the exam
rooms more like the
classroom where the
learning took place.
It is also helpful to the
police who sometimes take
victims back to the scene of
the crime to prompt further
memories.
The study is useful because
it supports the cue
dependent theory of
forgetting devised by
Tulving. This suggests that
memory traces are
improved through state
cues at encoding and
retrieval. In this case the
physiological effects of
alcohol.
This in turn can be used to
offer advice to students
when revising for exams.
They should consider
making their revision state
more like the exam state –
quiet, calm, drinking only
water and maybe chewing
a specific flavour gum for
each subject!
everyday experience (especially
for divers!) So the task lacked
mundane realism which makes
the experiment less ecologically
valid.
sea which meant they could have
been at risk – they did consent to
take part, they were trained
divers and most were interested
in the outcome of the research.
The internal (experimental)
validity was high because of the
high level of controls the
experimenters applied, for
example the words were
recorded, and the presentation
of the words was at the same
rate for each ppt whether on
the land or under the sea.
The experiment lacks ecological
validity because taking part in a
psychology experiment whilst
under the influence of alcohol is
not an everyday occurrence.
However it has internal
(experimental) validity because
of the high level of control
within the experiment. This
insured that the only variable
that could affect people’s
memory was the presence or
absence of alcohol during
encoding and retrieval.
Therefore a relationship
between the IV and DV could be
clearly established.
Although ppts gave informed
consent, this research could be
considered unethical as it is
possibly ill advised to allow ppts
to drink alcohol regardless of the
circumstances.
Cognitive Approach studies – EVALUATION TABLE
Using GRAVE state whether the evaluation point is a strength or a weakness for the study and explain your point.
Loftus and Palmer
(1974)
Care needs to be taken in
generalising from this study
because the sample was
limited to 48 students (in
experiment 1). This is not a
representative sample of a
wider target population.
However, the way that
memory works according to
the reconstructive memory
theory should be the same
for everyone – this means
that we can generalise from
this study to most people.
The experiment is reliable
because it was conducted
in a controlled lab
environment where the
procedure was
standardised and controls
used. For example ppts saw
the same videos of car
accidents and the same
questions were used. Only
the critical verb or critical
question was changed.
This means the experiment
can be replicated which in
turn suggests it is reliable.
The study is useful because
it supports reconstructive
memory theory proposed
by Bartlett. This suggests
that memory is altered over
time to fit in with existing
schemas or knowledge
about the world.
This in turn can be used to
offer advice to juries about
the reliability of eye
witness testimony.
The experiment lacks ecological
validity because the task of
answering questions about car
crashes watched on a video is
not an everyday occurrence.
Witnessing a real car accident
would be very different and the
witness may be emotionally
affected too which could also
affect their memory.
No harm was caused to ppts,
neither were any of the other
ethical guidelines breached.
Therefore we can assume this
experiment was ethical.
However it has internal
(experimental) validity because
of the high level of control
within the experiment. This
insured that the only variable
that could affect the estimate of
speed was the type of question
asked (how fast was the car
going when it ……). Therefore a
relationship between the IV and
DV could be clearly established.
It showed that changing one
word in a question could affect
the persons recall.
Look how similar the statements in each box are! It is like I cut and
pasted and added a few additional bits of information here and there!
Once you have understood the basics the rest is just about giving
examples 