EXPERIMENT NO.

1
INTRODUCTION TO EXPERIMENTATION

I. ABSTRACT

The introduction to experimentation is to familiarize the students

with some of the logic of research. The materials used are a Calculator,
Record notebook, 5 Strips of paper, and timer/stopwatch with second
hand. The Experimenter explained to the Subject the nature of the
experiment and the subject signed the informed consent. The
Experimenter (E) instructs the Subject (S) to write the alphabet backward
(from Z to A) as rapidly as possible. There will be 5 trials of 30 seconds
each with a one-minute rest between trials. After the first trial,
participants are to estimate the number expected in the second trial. The
same step is followed for the third, fourth, and fifth trials. As the trial
repeats, the subject’s estimated score is decreasing as well as the
achieved score. However, on the 5th trial, the Subject got a 5 achieved
score with an estimated score of 4. On the group tally, it shows that the
overall mean estimated score of each experimenter is higher than the
mean achieved score. It was concluded that to achieve good performance,
find a place that is quiet and peaceful, and Time pressure, interruptions,
and being nervous can reduce great results.
 II. INTRODUCTION 

                  
Practice effect has an impact on the outcomes of the test if it is
done repeatedly. Memory can be influenced by practice and repetition by
boosting encoding efficiency and improving recall from memory storage.
Learning and memory are influenced by the temporal distribution of
practice situations. One type of practice effect is the carryover effect and
happens when the outcomes of one test influence the findings of another.
The three categories of the carryover effect Participants may become
aware of the experiment's goal during the first treatment, which may
influence their conduct in subsequent treatments. Participants may get
instructions on one level that can benefit them on another level. One
level of the independent variable can have a clear impact on the levels
below it. (Stephanie, 2015).

The elaborative retrieval theory (Carpenter, 2009), which is based

on associative memory theories (Anderson et al., 1997) and the desirable
difficulty framework, is the first method (Bjork and Bjork, 2011). This
theory predicts two processes that are important in testing-based
learning. The first is the concept of activation spreading. Working on a
test task, according to this theory, does more than just reinforce current
retrieval cues. Retrieval also creates new cues by extending the activation
needed to recall similar contents in semantic memory that are near
together. As a result, searching for specific contents in associative
memory networks activates these specific contents as well as other
contents connected with them, even if the latter contents are not
retrieved directly. Carpenter (2009) created this method by evaluating
 word lists in tests. Testing impact studies, on the other hand, showed
evidence in favor of spreading activation in meaningful learning
(retrieval-induced facilitation). In a delayed evaluation task, Chan et al.
(2006) discovered that not only initially tested materials are more
accessible. Closely related topics can also be accessed more easily if they
are well-coordinated. The semantic elaboration of the primary recall
notion is driven by this spreading activation. The degree of semantic
elaboration is the second crucial process in elaborative retrieval theory.
The amount of mental effort put into semantic elaboration determines
the level of elaboration. This component of retrieval has gotten a lot of
attention and support (Rowland, 2014). According to this theory, a
difficult test task causes more mental effort and thus more activation,
which increases the directly retrieved learning contents (Halamish and
Bjork, 2011) and distributes the activation in semantic memory to
related items (Carpenter, 2009). Given this, the degree of semantic
elaboration can indicate how quickly contents can be found. As a result,
the mental effort might be used as a measure for semantic elaboration.
In terms of the educational implications, testing tasks that demand each
learner to exert significant mental effort should be used. If the task can
be completed effectively, a more complex assignment should lead to more
elaboration.

  
The transfer appropriate processing theory is the second
technique. According to Franks (2000), The Transfer appropriate
processing tends to emphasize general patterns of processing when
applied to implicit memory (e.g., perceptual or conceptual processing).
The Transfer Appropriate Processing principle was used in more detail in
the current investigations to analyze the relationships between the
processing done during the first and second exposures to things. Testing
 has an advantage over restudying because the cognitive processes used
during transfer tasks are more like those used during first testing
(Thomas and McDaniel, 2007). Furthermore, the testing effect should be
higher if the sorts of issues (e.g., free-recall or short-answer) during
initial testing and transfer or an assessment test are the same, as the
cognitive processes should be similar. Most studies that supported a
transfer-appropriate processing viewpoint compared recognition and
recall procedures (Johnson and Mayer, 2009). 

According to (“Infovore Secrets”, n.d.) Singing (memory songs) and

repetition are centuries-old memory methods. The ability to use both
repetition and singing as memory strategies can dramatically enhance
the quantity of knowledge you can keep in your mind in a short period.
Repetition for memorization is a method of memorizing a set of texts by
repeating them at regular intervals. Singing for memory is a technique
for memorizing a set of texts. A memory song is a song that has been
precisely constructed to aid in the memorization of information.
Composing a memory song, when done correctly, can aid in swiftly
recalling a piece of information. We remember songs because we hear
them over and over; we've heard this one a lot. Every time we hear it,
we're reviewing it. Like when we are still a little kid, we never get tired of
listening to children's songs and one of them is the ABC that is why we
easily memorized it by heart. Memory songs can stick with you for
decades after you've learned them. Memory songs and repetition, when
utilized correctly, can considerably assist children's memory.

 
Attention Control Theory according to (Eysenck et al., 2007),
expresses anxiety decreased attention regulation, which leads to
performance deficiencies in tasks using the working memory system's
central executive. This theoretical position is based on the idea that (1) a
goal-directed attention system and (2) a stimulus-driven attention system
govern attention (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002). Expectations, knowledge,
and current goals guide the goal-directed attention system, which
illustrates top-down attention control. The more worry you have, the
more trouble you'll have. In dual-task research of anxiety, primary
working memory task performance in high anxious persons deteriorated
only when the supplementary task required executive control (Eysenck &
Derakshan, 2011). (Gustavson & Miyake, 2016) discovered that anxiety
is linked to slow working memory updating.
 III. METHOD

A. Objective
 

To familiarize the students with some of the logic of research.

 
B. Hypothesis

The Subject’s estimated score and achieved a score in every trial

will increase.

C. Materials

 Calculator
 Record notebook
 5 Strips of paper
 Timer/stopwatch with second hand
 D. Design and Procedure

1. The Experimenter (E) Invited the Subject (S) to participate in this

experiment.
2. The Experimenter (E) explained to the Subject (S) the nature of the
experiment and the subject signed the informed consent.
3. The Experimenter (E) instructs the Subject (S) to write the alphabet
backward (from Z to A) as rapidly as possible.
4. There will be 5 trials of 30 seconds each with a one-minute rest
between trials.
5. After the first trial, participants are to estimate the number expected
in the second trial.
6. The same step is followed for the third, fourth, and fifth trials.
7. After the experiment, I recorded the Subject’ scores on my Record
notebook.

E. Subject

It is the first time that the Subject participating in an experiment. The

subject is a 47-year-old, female, fourth of the nine siblings.
 IV. RESULTS

A. Tables

Table 1

Estimated and Achieved Scored of the Individual Participant

TRIAL ESTIMATED SCORE ACHIEVED SCORE

1 X 5
2 10 3
3 5 2
4 6 1
5 4 5
Mean XES= 6.25 XAS= 3.20
 Table 2

Mean Estimated and Achieved Score (Group Data)

EXPERIMENTER MEAN ESTIMATED SCORE MEAN ACHIEVED SCORE

NO.
E1 8.75 8.40
E2 7.00 10.60
E3 0 0
E4 13.75 7.40
E5 12.00 14.00
E6 12.00 12.20
E7 5.00 3.00
E8 13.25 9.80
E9 23.50 4.00
E10 12.25 12.60
E11 16.75 15.80
E12 12.00 10.80
E13 17.50 3.00
E14 13.50 7.20
E15 7.50 1.00
 E16 15.75 6.60
E17 8.25 7.80
E18 11.75 15.40
E19 7.00 7.00
E20 6.50 9.80
E21 21.50 3.00
E22 11.25 8.00
E23 12.20 12.00
E24 12.40 10.20
E25 17.50 15.60
E26 16.50 19.00
E27 6.25 3.20
E28 11.25 7.00
Overall Mean 11.89 8.73
 B. Figures

Figure 1

Graphical Presentation of Estimated and Achieved Scored of the Individual

Participants

25

20

15

10

Estimated
Score
0 Achieved Score
1 2 3 4 5

TRIAL

Figure 2
 Graphical Presentation of Mean Estimated and Achieved Score
(Group Data)

25

20

15

10

Mean Estimated
Score
Mean Achieved Score
0
0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 E10 E11 E12 E13 E14 E15 E16 E17 E18 E19 E20 E21 E22 E23 E24 E25 E26 E27 E28

V. DISCUSSION
 As presented in Table 1 above that the subject’s estimated
score and achieved a score in writing the alphabet backward. The
subject’s estimated score is decreasing as well as the achieved score. The
subject got a 5 achieved score at the first trial. Since the subject got 5
achieved a score on the first trial, the subject was kind of confident and
thinks that will get 10 in the next trial. As the subject keeps on getting a
low achieved score on every trial, the subject is also decreasing the
estimated score on every trial. However, on the 5th trial, the Subject got
a 5 achieved score with an estimated score of 4. It means that the
practice effect did not work for the subject.

Table 2 shows the group collation of the mean estimated score and
mean achieved score. The highest mean estimated score is 23.50 by
Experimenter No. 9 with a mean achieved a score of 4.00. Moreover, the
highest mean achieved score is 19.00 by experimenter no. 26 with a
mean estimated score of 16.50. However, the lowest mean estimated
score is 5 by Experimenter No. 7 and the lowest mean achieved score is 1
by Experimenter No.15. Table 2 also shows that the overall mean
estimated score of each experimenter is higher than the mean achieved
score.

Figure 1 presents the graphical illustration of the Subject’s

Estimated and Achieved score in writing the alphabet backward. We can
also see as the trial repeats, The Subject’s estimated score and achieved
a score on the graph is decreasing. It seems like the practice effect did
not work on the subject. However, on the 5th trial, the subject exceeded
its estimated score of 4 and got 5 on the achieved score.

Figure 2 presents the graphical Illustration of the mean estimated

and achieved a score in the group data. As you can see in figure 2 that
there mean estimated scores from each experimenter are higher than the
mean achieved score.

The subject has trouble remembering letters and must sing the
entire alphabet to know where the next letter is. The subject is also too
nervous pressured to think and write the alphabet backward. When
given a minute break, the person loses concentration. The noise level in
the area also contributes to the individual's distraction. As the trials
progressed, it was evident that the subject was losing attention to the
task because of pressure and nervousness. We can see that as the trial
repeats, even if the Subject was familiar with the task, because of
nervousness and pressure, the performance level of the subject is
decreasing. According to Eysenck et al., (2007) on the Attention Control
Theory expresses anxiety decreased attention regulation, which leads to
performance deficiencies in tasks using the working memory system's
central executive. In addition to that, Eysenck & Derakshan, (2011) said
that” the more worry you have, the more trouble you'll have.”
 On the group data, some of the subjects exceeded their estimated
score like the subject of experimenter no. 2, experimenter no.5,
experimenter no.18 and, 11.25 (see scores in Table 2). Meaning, the
practice effect helps the subjects to recall the alphabet backward.
Thomas and McDaniel, (2007) found that The Transfer Appropriate
Processing principle was used in more detail in the current investigations
to analyze the relationships between the processing done during the first
and second exposures to things. Testing has an advantage over
restudying because the cognitive processes used during transfer tasks
are more like those used during first testing. Some of the subjects have a
high mean estimated score, but low mean achieved scores like
experimenter no.9 and experimenter no. 21 (see the scores on table 2).
The said experimenters shared in the class why their subject's mean
achieved score is low and it is because their subjects reached the letter
“A” but, there is a mistake in writing them. The subjects misplaced some
letters, or they forgot to put the next correct letters.

To practice, chop the alphabet backward in a song-like manner.

ZYX, WVU, TSRQP, ONM, LKJ, IHG, FED, CBA. While resting for one
minute, the participant might utilize his or her inner voice to recall the
sequence. Look also for a space where the subject will not be disturbed
because if distractions are removed, an individual's outcome may
improve. Also, you can cheer on the subject before the experiment starts.
 VI. CONCLUSIONS

1. It was concluded in the experiment that practicing plays a significant

role in all learning processes.
2. Retrieving memory in a short period can mess up the tasks given.
3. To achieve good performance, find a place that is quiet and peaceful.
4. Time pressure, interruptions, and being too nervous can reduce great
results.
5. Focusing on the task and try to calm the subject to think well and do
well in the task.
6. Some of the Experimenter’s subjects is practiced and learned to write
the alphabet backward every trial during the experiment.
 VII. REFERENCES

Bjork, E. L., and Bjork, R. A. (2011).

“Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: creating desirable

difficulties to enhance learning,” in Psychology and the Real World:
Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, eds M. A.
Gernsbacher, R. W. Pew, L. M. Hough, and J. R. Pomerantz (New York,
NY: Worth Publishers), 56–64.

Carpenter, S. K. (2009).

Cue strength as a moderator of the testing effect: the benefits of

elaborative retrieval. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 35, 1563–1569.
doi: 10.1037/a0017021

Chan, J. C. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2006).

Retrieval-induced facilitation: Initially nontested material can benefit

from prior testing of related material. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
General, 135(4), 553–571. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-
3445.135.4.553

Corbetta M, Shulman GL. (2002).

Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nat

Rev Neurosci. (3):201-15. doi: 10.1038/nrn755. PMID:
11994752.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11994752/

Eysenck MW, Derakshan N, Santos R, Calvo MG. (2007)

Anxiety and cognitive performance: attentional control theory. Emotion.

(2):336-53. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336PMID: 17516812.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17516812/

Eysenck, M. W., and Derakshan, N. (2011).

 New perspectives in attentional control theory. Pers. Individ.
Differ. 50, 955–960. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01738.x

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188691000421

Gustavson, D. E., and Miyake, A. (2016).

Trait worry is associated with difficulties in working memory

updating. Cogn. Emotion 30, 1289–1303. doi:
0.1080/02699931.2015.1060194 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs
/10.1080/02699931.2015.1060194

Franks, J.J., Bilbrey, C.W., Lien, K.G. et al. (2000).

Transfer-appropriate processing (TAP). Memory & Cognition 28, 1140–

1151 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211815

Halamish, V., & Bjork, R. A. (2011).

When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based

interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 801–812.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023219

Infovore Secrets. (n.d.)

Using Memory Songs and Spaced Repetition as Memory Techniques,

Chapter 7. Retrieved from https://infovoresecrets.com/memory-
techniques/memory-song-and-repetition/#

Johnson, C. I., & Mayer, R. E. (2009).

A testing effect with multimedia learning. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 101(3), 621–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015183
McCabe D., Langer K.G., Borod J.C., Bender H.A. (2011)
 Practice Effects. In: Kreutzer J.S., DeLuca J., Caplan B. (eds)
Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer, New York, NY.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_1139

Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention:

A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin,
140(6), 1432–1463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037559

Stephanie Glen. (2015).

"Practice Effect & Carry Over Effect Definition & Examples"

From StatisticsHowTo.com: Elementary Statistics for the rest of
us! https://www.statisticshowto.com/practice-effect/

Thomas, A.K., McDaniel, M.A. (2007).

The negative cascade of incongruent generative study-test processing in

memory and metacomprehension. Memory & Cognition 35, 668–678
https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193305