Introduction
Included in this is the requirement that your background research come from reputable sources.
Humans have the capability of being faster than a computer and more efficient when it comes to recognizing visual patterns. We can interpret a stimulus and analyze it within a couple seconds. Reicher, a psychologist who was doing his dissertation in 1969 at the University of Michigan created an experiment that would ask: is it easier to recognize a letter by itself or a letter in a word? (Reed, 2013). He wanted to inspect a possible implication of the scan component in Sperling’s 1967 model (Reed, 2013). The purpose of Reicher’s experiment was to explain how humans process information when it comes to letters and words. Reicher’s experiment consisted of exposing letters either in a word or a nonword for a quick amount of time to see if the participant would recognize one more accurately than the other. He found that the majority of participants were not only more accurate but faster when responding to the words than to the nonwords. It was also true that it is easier to recognize a letter when it is in a word rather than it being by itself. Reicher’s hypothesis is that recognizing a letter in a word rather a nonword is easier.
Add more background research baron x Thomas or something
Methods
To reiterate, in Reicher’s experiment he used words, or nonwords to find out if people identified a letter more easily when it is in a word rather than a nonword (Reed, 2013). He had to do this experiment repeatedly to assess that his findings were true. Reed (2013) describes an experiment of Reicher’s that explains these findings. Participants were shown a single letter, a four-letter word or a four-letter nonword and were then asked to identify a certain letter within these circumstances. An example given is the word ‘WORK’ which was shown to the participants. The participants were given two letters either a ‘D’ or a ‘K’ (Reed, 2013). participants were shown a nonword condition where the letters could potentially be scrambled, such as ‘OWRK’, and then they had to yet again choose either the fourth letter was ‘D’ or ‘K’. The independent variables of this particular experiment would then be the three different conditions, word, letter and the nonword form. Followed by the dependent variable, which measures and shows the reaction times of the participants to the specific conditions and their ability to pick the correct letter
Doing this in CogLab was a little different. On each trial, the participant saw two stimuli, either two words or two nonwords. The words or nonwords could be the same or could differ by one letter. The task was to indicate whether they were the same or different.
The independent variable is whether the two stimuli were words or nonwords. Two dependent variables were measured: The proportion of times the participant correctly responded same or different and the mean time to make that response.
Result
Remind reader of hypothesis(es)
Present statistical analysis/comparisons of your findings
Summarize major outcome(s) of the experiment
I found that I was faster and more accurate with words than with nonwords.
Discussion
Theoretical conclusions and real-world implications
Anything you think should have been done differently? It is not enough
to simply say “increase sample size.” Why would your suggestion of a change make any difference?
Further ideas (experiment ideas) relating to your hypothesis(es) What
would you expect to occur if your experimental ideas came to fruition?
Now is the time to evaluate your results and put them in a broader framework of research. (i.e., Who cares,what does it mean, why should I be excited by these findings?How do they affect the theories you discussed in theintroduction? Do they confirm, disagree
References
Baron, J., & Thurston, I. (1973). An analysis of the word-superiority effect. Cognitive Psychology, 4(2), 207–228. https://0-doi-org.wizard.umd.umich.edu/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90012-1
Reed, S.K. (2013). Cognition: Theories and Applications (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Reicher, G. M. (1969). Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81(2), 275–280. https://0-doi-org.wizard.umd.umich.edu/10.1037/h0027768
Silverman, W. P. (1985). Two types of word superiority effects in a speeded matching task. Memory & Cognition, 13(1), 50–56. https://0-doi-org.wizard.umd.umich.edu/10.3758/BF03198443.
Order with us today for a quality custom paper on the above topic or any other topic! What Awaits you: • High Quality custom-written papers • Automatic plagiarism check • On-time delivery guarantee • Masters and PhD-level writers • 100% Privacy and Confidentiality