Does Word Length or Orthographical Neighbourhood Size?

Does Word Length or Orthographical locality Size Effect Working Memory? Abstract Baddeley, Thomson and Buchanan (1975) were the first to systematically examine the effect of countersignature length on memory finding that short enounces were recalled more easily than persistent crys. This became cognise as the enunciate length effect (WLE Baddeley et al. 1975). Since this study WLE was further examined and presented mixed results (e. g. Baddeley, 2000 Cowan et al, 1992 Lewandowsky & Oberauer, 2009 Lovatt, Avons & Masterson, 2000).In 2011 Jalbert, Neath, Bireta, and Surprenant suggested that previous research conducted whitethorn have been subject to a confounding inconstant, orthographical neighbourhood size (ONS). In a study by Jalbert, Neath and Surprenant (2011) it was concluded that neighbourhood size, not length of the word, is important on that pointfore forgetting in short-term memory whitethorn be due to other variables than decay. The present study was further inves tigating the effect of word length and ONS by using 22 within groups ANOVA. The independent variables were word length and ONS.They both had 2 levels 1 syllable (short) and 3 syllables (long) for word length and 3-5 neighbours (small) and 7-9 neighbours (large) for neighbourhood size. Words for the ONS were selected using MCWord, an online orthographic database (Medler & Binder, 2005). The dependent variable was the number of words successfully recalled in the correct company. It was hypothesized that short words would be recalled better than long words, and that words with a large ONS would be recalled better than words with a small ONS.There will be no interaction between the two groups. There were eight participants (Leeds Met undergraduates) selected through convenience sampling. The experiment was fulfill with the use of E-prime (Schneider, Eschman, & Zuccolotto, 2002). Participants were presented with six words then words were displayed on the left side of the screen, parti cipants were asked to indicate the order in which they had been presented in. The number of correctly recorded words was used as the measure of the accuracy of their memories.Results showed that there was no significant effect on the ease of recall relating to either word length or ONS, therefore not supporting the hypotheses or previous research. This could be due to a small judge size. The different stimuli used whitethorn also have been problematic as previous research indicates (Bireta, Neath & Surprenant, 2006). This may imply that there is another reason for why forgetting occurs and it is not specifically related to decay or ONS. Further investigation into this is recommended. References Baddeley, A.D. , Thomson, N. , & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of communicatory Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575589. Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417423 . Bireta, T. J. , Neath, I. , & Surprenant, A. M. (2006). The syllable-based word length effect and stimulus set specificity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 434438. Cowan, N. , Day, L. , Saults, J. S. , Kellar, T. A. , Johnson, T. , & Flores, L. 1992). The role of verbal output term in the effects of word length on immediate memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 31, 1-17. Jalbert, A. , Neath, I. , Bireta, T. J. , & Surprenant, A. M. (2011). When does length cause the word length effect? Journal of observational Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 338353. Jalbert, A. , Neath, I. & Surprenant, A. M. (2011). Does length or neighbourhood size cause the word length effect? Memory and Cognition, 39, 1198-1210. Lewandowsky, S. , & Oberauer, K. (2009).No evidence for temporal decay in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology Association Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1545-1551. Lovatt, P. , Avons, S. E. , & Masterson, J. (2002). Output decay in immediate s erial recall Speech time revisited. Journal of Memory & Language, 46, 227-243. Medler, D. A. , & Binder, J. R. (2005) MCWord An on-line orthographic database of the English language. Schneider, W. , Eschman, A. , & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime Users Guide. Pittsburgh Psychology Software Tools, Inc.