RESEARCH REPORT

Question 1

what kind of study was our study?

Answer 1

a 2x2 between-subjects factorial with 4 conditions, 2 variables with 2 levels each
AND WMC assessed with OSPAN task

Question 2

where was the WMC assessment taken from?

Answer 2

sanchez + wiley

Question 3

largely, what did sanchez + wiley find?

what did they say this was evidence of?

Answer 3

• no differences in background knowledge between HWMC / LWMC
• LWMC were negatively affected by seductive images on BOTH essay + IVT
• no consistent benefits for HWMC

evidence of lack of attentional control for LWMC

Question 4

inspiration from the manipulations for our study were taken from whom? what accounts did they attempt to distinguish between

which account did they end up supporting

Answer 4

Kienitz
* diversion
* disruption

DIVERSION

Question 5

define diversion + which prompt related to in KIENITZ

Answer 5

seductive details cause deeper processing of seductive details rather than pertinent content, harming recall

• prompt kienitz: telling participants the images aren’t relevant

Question 6

define disruption

Answer 6

seductive details cause unsuccessful attempts to integrate seductive details with pertinent content

• prompt kienitz: separate the image information because it’s related to a different topic

Question 7

in kienitz, diversion prompt was effective/ineffective, separation prompt was effective/ineffective

Answer 7

diversion: highly effective
separation: ineffective but actually worsened recall

Question 8

what are 2 criticisms of kienitz’s separation prompt

how does ours address it

Answer 8

• probably involved extra cognitive load so makes sense it would lower recall
• information actually was related to the main topic, so might have confused people
• ours physically separated it, so necessitates separation + avoids faulty integration

Question 9

if manipulations were entirely distinct in their effects, what would we expect?

Answer 9

main effects with no interactions
* variables additive –> images on a separate page AND being told they’re not relevant would be most helpful
but if disruption.diversion overlap maybe not as neat

Question 10

OUR STUDY - telling participants the images weren’t relevant had what effect on participants?

Answer 10

HWMC: worse performance
LWMC: no diff

Question 11

OUR STUDY: images on a separate page AND telling people they were irrelevant had what effect

Answer 11

HWMC: no diff
LWMC: worse performance

Question 12

OUR STUDY: separating images had what effect?

Answer 12

HWMC: worse performance
LWMC: no diff

Question 13

“We expect that low WMC participants who are told that the images are not relevant will understand the material better” <– is this a hypothesis

Answer 13

no - need justification

Question 14

what was a big flaw in our design?

Answer 14

• no maximum times

Question 15

graph: figure label where

Answer 15

top

Question 16

your abstract should be written ___ and consist of___ sentences explaining…

Answer 16

last
4
background, what you did, what you found, what it means

Question 17

which sections of the report are labelled with their section name?

Answer 17

• abstract
• results
• discussion
• references

Question 18

what’s the mark weighting + time allocation
abstract
intro
results
discussion
ref’s

Answer 18

abstract: 10%, 20 min
intro: 35%, 10-15hr
results: 20%, 1hr
discussion: 30%, 3hr
references: 5% –