The levels of processing effect was the creation of Robert S. Lockhart and Fergus I. M. Craik in 1972. The duo introduced this model as an alternative to prior memory theories (Atkinson & Shiffrin) which had divided memory into sensory, working and long-term stages.
Discover 30 more articles on this topic Basically Craik & Lockhart believed that the depth of mental processing affected memory function. Memories that were deeply processed led to longer lasting memories while shallow processing led to memories that decayed easily. Shallow processing occurs in four ways:
Deep or semantic processing occurs in three ways:
Simply put, the way we process information totally affects the extent that it is memorized according to the levels of processing model. Deep and semantic processing involves us thinking deeply about something which causes the memory of it to be easily accessed. Whereas shallow processing only thinks about the surface of something, meaning it soon decays and is forgotten. There are three factors which determine if a memory remains:
The levels of processing model suggests that the only one of the above factors which improves Long-Term Memory (LTM) is elaborative rehearsal. DifferencesThere are a number of differences between this and the Atkinson-Shiffrin model. While the Atkinson-Shiffrin model concentrated on long and short-term memory (STM), the levels of processing model focuses on the processes that make up memory and does not distinguish between LTM and STM. According to levels of processing, only elaborative rehearsal improves LTM while the Atkinson-Shiffrin model suggests that any form of rehearsal leads to an improvement in LTM. Unlike the Atkinson-Shiffrin model which structured LTM and STM, levels of processing has no set structure. StrengthsCraik & Lockhart's model has a number of strengths. It was the first theory to show that memory is actually improved when it undergoes deeper processing. This in turn explained why certain things are better remembered than others. It also proved that encoding is not a simple process. Finally, brain imaging studies showed that higher levels of processing lead to greater activity levels in different parts of the brain which gives the theory some credence. WeaknessesIn terms of weaknesses, the theory is better described than explained. It seems to be a rather simple explanation for such a complex subject with the terms 'deep' and 'shallow' hardly an all-encompassing look into the theory of memory. The part of the theory which suggests that shallow processing equals a memory being quickly lost is not 100% accurate in all cases. Those with illnesses that affect memory cannot be included in the levels of processing theory. Finally, this theory was espoused in 1972 but since then, various neuropsychological studies have suggested that there are specific systems of storage and structures contained in our memory. 5-11.According to the levels-of-processing approach, the most effective way to learn a passagein a textbook is usually in terms ofa.its meaning.b.its physical characteristics.c.the sound of the words that you need to remember.d.the color of ink in which the passage is printedAnswer: aSection Ref: Encoding in Long-Term Memory
Craik & Tulving wanted to test whether the level of processing affected how well we remember information. By "depth of processing", we mean, the way in which a person thinks about a piece of information, for example, a shallow level of processing of a word would be to skim over a sentence and to understand the sentence without dwelling on the individual word. In this way, we have processed the meaning of the word, but only in order to understand the sentence. A deeper level of processing, on the other hand, would be to look at the word by itself, outside of a sentence, and to think of what the word means; maybe even what other words rhyme with it. This way, we are also more likely to remember it. How Craik & Tulving set out to test level of processingIn 1975, the researchers conducted an experiment in which participants were shown a list of 60 words. They were then asked to recall certain words by being shown one of three questions, each testing a different level of processing, similar to:
Out of another larger list, the participants were asked to pick out the appropriate word, as the original words had been mixed into this list. FindingsCraik & Tulving found that participants were better able to recall words which had been processed more deeply - that is, processed semantically, supporting level of processing theory. Evaluation of this experiment
More on Craik & Lockhart's Levels of Processing theory is available here More Memory Theories:Multi-Store Model: A popular explanation of how we remember. Multi-Store Model Miller's Magic Number: How many chunks of information can our memories store? Magic Number Working Memory Model: Do our memories work to process information? Working Memory Model Forgetting & Recall: A look at how psychologists think information can be 'forgotten' and retrieved Memory Decay (Peterson & Peterson, 1959): How fast does our Short-term Memory Decay? Memory Improvement TechniquesRemember lists of information: Use the Luria method and convert lists to journeys. Read more... Memorizing phone numbers: Discover this popular mnemonics technique: the Pegword Method Need to remember anything else? The Retentive Method is a powerful method. By Dr. Saul McLeod, published 2007 The levels of processing model (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) focuses on the depth of processing involved in memory, and predicts the deeper information is processed, the longer a memory trace will last. Craik defined depth as:
Unlike the multi-store model it is a non-structured approach. The basic idea is that memory is really just what happens as a result of processing information. Memory is just a by-product of the depth of processing of information, and there is no clear distinction between short term and long term memory. Therefore, instead of concentrating on the stores/structures involved (i.e. short term memory & long term memory), this theory concentrates on the processes involved in memory. We can process information in 3 ways: Shallow Processing- This takes two forms
Shallow processing only involves maintenance rehearsal (repetition to help us hold something in the STM) and leads to fairly short-term retention of information. This is the only type of rehearsal to take place within the multi-store model. Deep Processing- This takes two forms
Deep processing involves elaboration rehearsal which involves a more meaningful analysis (e.g. images, thinking, associations etc.) of information and leads to better recall. For example, giving words a meaning or linking them with previous knowledge. SummaryLevels of processing: The idea that the way information is encoded affects how well it is remembered. The deeper the level of processing, the easier the information is to recall.  Key Study: Craik and Tulving (1975)AimTo investigate how deep and shallow processing affects memory recall.MethodParticipants were presented with a series of 60 words about which they had to answer one of three questions. Some questions required the participants to process the word in a deep way (e.g. semantic) and others in a shallow way (e.g. structural and phonemic). For example:
Participants were then given a long list of 180 words into which the original words had been mixed. They were asked to pick out the original words. ResultsParticipants recalled more words that were semantically processed compared to phonemically and visually processed words.ConclusionSemantically processed words involve elaboration rehearsal and deep processing which results in more accurate recall. Phonemic and visually processed words involve shallow processing and less accurate recall.Real Life ApplicationsThis explanation of memory is useful in everyday life because it highlights the way in which elaboration, which requires deeper processing of information, can aid memory. Three examples of this are.
The above examples could all be used to revise psychology using semantic processing (e.g. explaining memory models to your mum, using mind maps etc.) and should result in deeper processing through using elaboration rehearsal. Consequently more information will be remembered (and recalled) and better exam results should be achieved. Critical EvaluationStrengthsThe theory is an improvement on Atkinson & Shiffrin’s account of transfer from STM to LTM. For example, elaboration rehearsal leads to recall of information than just maintenance rehearsal. The levels of processing model changed the direction of memory research. It showed that encoding was not a simple, straightforward process. This widened the focus from seeing long-term memory as a simple storage unit to seeing it as a complex processing system. Craik and Lockhart's ideas led to hundreds of experiments, most of which confirmed the superiourity of 'deep' semantic processing for remembering information. It explains why we remember some things much better and for much longer than others. This explanation of memory is useful in everyday life because it highlights the way in which elaboration, which requires deeper processing of information, can aid memory. WeaknessesDespite these strengths, there are a number of criticisms of the levels of processing theory:
Eysenck (1990) claims that the levels of processing theory describes rather than explains. Craik and Lockhart (1972) argued that deep processing leads to better long-term memory than shallow processing. However, they failed to provide a detailed account of why deep processing is so effective. However, recent studies have clarified this point - it appears that deeper coding produces better retention because it is more elaborate. Elaborative encoding enriches the memory representation of an item by activating many aspects of its meaning and linking it into the pre-existing network of semantic associations. Later research indicated that processing is more complex and varied than the levels of processing theory suggests. In other words, there is more to processing than depth and elaboration. For example, research by Bransford et al. (1979) indicated that a sentence such as, 'A mosquito is like a doctor because both draw blood' is more likely to be recalled than the more elaborated sentence, 'A mosquito is like a racoon because they both have head, legs and jaws'. It appears that it is the distinctiveness of the first sentence which makes it easier to remember - it's unusual to compare a doctor to a mosquito. As a result, the sentence stands out and is more easily recalled. Another problem is that participants typically spend a longer time processing the deeper or more difficult tasks. So, it could be that the results are partly due to more time being spent on the material. The type of processing, the amount of effort & the length of time spent on processing tend to be confounded. Deeper processing goes with more effort and more time, so it is difficult to know which factor influences the results. The ideas of 'depth' and 'elaboration' are vague and ill defined (Eysenck, 1978). As a result, they are difficult to measure. Indeed, there is no independent way of measuring the depth of processing. This can lead to a circular argument - it is predicted that deeply processed information will be remembered better, but the measure of depth of processing is how well the information is remembered. The levels of processing theory focuses on the processes involved in memory, and thus ignores the structures. There is evidence to support the idea of memory structures such as STM and LTM as the Multi-Store Model proposed (e.g. H.M., serial position effect etc.). Therefore, memory is more complex than described by the LOP theory. Download this article as a PDF How to reference this article:McLeod, S. A. (2007, December 14). Levels of processing. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html APA Style ReferencesBransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., Morris, C.D., & Stein, B.S.(1979). Some general constraints on learning and memory research. In L.S. Cermak & F.I.M. Craik(Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp.331–354). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesInc. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal behavior, 11, 671-684. Craik, F.I.M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294. Eysenck, M. W. & Keane, M. T. (1990). Cognitive psychology: a student's handbook, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd., Hove, UK. Download this article as a PDF How to reference this article:McLeod, S. A. (2007, December 14). Levels of processing. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html Home | About Us | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Contact Us Simply Psychology's content is for informational and educational purposes only. Our website is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. © Simply Scholar Ltd - All rights reserved |
What is one explanation that Craik and his colleagues propose for why a deep level of processing leads to greater recall?
Pos Terkait
Copyright © 2024 ketajaman Inc.
