Context-Dependent Memory in Two Natural Environments: On Land and Underwater

1. Context-Dependent Memory in Two Natural Environments: On Land and Underwater Godden & Baddeley (1975), Experiment 1 Week x, Presentation x Zach Hambrick Month, Day, 2011

2. Context-Dependent Memory The idea that what is learned in a given environment is best recalled in that environment.

3. Hypothesis Performance when learning and recall take place in the same environment should be better than when learning and recall take place in a different environment. Predicted Results… Recall Environment A B Recall Performance B A Learning Environment

4. Hypothesis Performance when learning and recall take place in the same environment should be better than when learning and recall take place in a different environment. Predicted Results… Recall Environment * A * B Recall Performance B A Learning Environment

5. Hypothesis Performance when learning and recall take place in the same environment should be better than when learning and recall take place in a different environment. Predicted Results… Recall Environment A B Recall Performance * * B A Learning Environment

6. Background Previous Studies Inconsistent findings Low ecological validity Ecological validity – the degree to which results are applicable to the real-world, and are not limited to artificial conditions of lab.

7. Major Goal Investigate context-dependent memory in two natural environments…

8. Major Goal Investigate context-dependent memory in two natural environments… On Land andUnder Water

9. Experiment 1 Subjects N = 18 Diving club members Open-water site near Oban, Scotland (the study location)

10. Experiment 1 Design Independent Variables - Learning (Dry vs. Wet) - Recall (Dry vs. Wet) Dependent Variable - Number words recalled Learning Environment Dry Wet Dry Recall Environment Wet Completely within-subjects design— 2 (Learning: Dry vs. Wet) x 2 (Recall: Dry vs. Wet)

11. Experiment 1 Apparatus Communication sets Word lists (36 words each) Lists audio-recorded Umbrella Alligator 2 sec Diamond 4 sec Banana 2 sec Sofa Heaven

12. Experiment 1 Procedure (1) Breathing pattern instructions (2) Word List (1st Presentation) (3) 10-sec pause for unconstrained breathing (4) Breathing pattern instructions (5) Word List (2nd Presentation) (6) 15 digits to copy, 2 digits/sec (7) “Ascend to the shore station.” (8) 4-min delay (9) Free recall (2-min) One condition per session, at least 24 hr between sessions

13. Experiment 1 Predicted Results… Review of Hypothesis Performance when learning and recall take place in the same environment should be better than when learning and recall take place in a different environment. Recall Environment A B Recall Performance B A Learning Environment

14. Experiment 1 Actual Results… 16 16 Results No main effects, but a significant interaction between recall environment and learning environment. 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 No. Words Correct 6 6 Recall Environment 4 4 Dry 2 2 Wet 0 0 Wet Dry Learning Environment

15. Experiment 1 Actual Results… 16 16 Results No main effects, but a significant interaction between recall environment and learning environment. 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 No. Words Correct 6 6 Recall Environment 4 4 Dry 2 2 Wet 0 0 Wet Dry Learning Environment

16. Experiment 1 Actual Results… 16 16 Results Performance when learning and recall took place in the same environment was better than when learning and recall took place in a different environment. 14 14 12 12 10 10 8 8 No. Words Correct 6 6 Recall Environment 4 4 Dry 2 2 Wet 0 0 Wet Dry Learning Environment

17. Experiment 1 Conclusion Results are “clearly in line with the context-dependent memory hypothesis” (p. 328)

18. Experiment 1 Conclusion Despite limited control over experimental conditions, e.g., different testing times, one subject nearly getting run over by an “amphibious DUKW”!

19. Experiment 1 Conclusion Despite limited control over experimental conditions, e.g., different testing times, one subject nearly getting run over by an “amphibious DUKW”!