Effects on Memory Recall Due to Self and Other References

Kaitlin Matheny

Adrian College
 Abstract

Within the world of Psychology, there are many existing studies regarding memory recall. A few

examples are King (2012), Unsworth (2015), and Kuiper & Rogers (1979). The current study

contained 32 participants who were college students, 17 of which were female, 15 of which were

male. Participants were to complete three tasks; rate whether or not the listed word describes

them or the other individual along with a confidence rating, complete as many math problems as

possible within three minutes, and then recall as many words they could from the first task

within three minutes. The confidence ratings and the number of words correctly recalled between

the two conditions were analyzed. The results were non-significant in terms to support our

hypothesis.
 Effects on Memory Recall Due to Self and Other References

Many existing studies in the world of Psychology involve memory recall, like King

(2012), Unsworth (2015), and Kuiper & Rogers (1979). Furthermore, here is one example of a

memory recall study: King (2012) study where the specific interest is in whether or not

memories are purposely manipulated in order to forget about unpleasant memories such as,

action conducted or experienced. In which, would be thought to result in protection of the self-

esteem and for the individual to feel less guilty about a negative act conducted. Another major

question King (2012) was looking to answer was if negative emotions created by a negative

encounter would decrease accuracy of memory recall. King (2012) hypothesized that negative

encounters and emotions would in fact cause lower accuracy in memory recall of the situation

due to self-manipulation of memories.

King (2012) went about the study by randomly selecting participants and randomly

assigning them to the two different groups. One group was labeled Player A and the other was

labeled Player B. In the first stage, (participants were unaware of stage 2) Player A had the

choice to choose from two conditions, A1 (no trust) or A2 (trust). If Player A chose A1, he or she

would receive 3 euro and Player B would receive nothing. If Player A chose A2, he/she would be

trusting Player B to make the more fair option. Player B also had a choice between two

conditions, B1 (kind) or B2 (unkind). If player B chose B1, both Player A and Player B would

receive 5 euro. On the other hand, if Player B chose B2, he/she would receive 10 euro and Player

A would receive nothing. Next, in order to measure how each players choice influenced their

recall on the situation, they were given an online questionnaire. The timing in which each

participant engaged in the questionnaire after stage one was manipulated between three

conditions: 0 days (participants answered questionnaire directly after finishing stage one before
leaving the examination room), 7 days later, and 43 days later. King (2012) concluded that the

participants who experienced the unkind or no trust situation had lower recall accuracy of what

choice the other player and themselves made compared to those who experienced the kind and

trust situation; in which accuracy of recall was perfect. The results King (2012) found supported

the second part of his hypothesis; those who committed the unkind or no trust act tended to

unconsciously sway their memory of what choice they made and what choice the other

participant made across all three conditions.

Unsworth (2015) conducted a different study involving memory recall. His main interest

was analyzing and looking at the nature and relation between the recall of working memory

capacity and long-term memory. Unsworth (2015) had two main goals. The first goal was to

answer whether or not encoding strategies during free recall have any relation to working

memory capacity based around individual differences. In order to achieve that, participants

performed 3 free recall tasks in which five lists of ten words would appear on a computer screen

for a specific amount of time. Each word was a noun that was randomly generated. Every

participant received the same lists of words. In the first task, one word at a time, a word would

appear upon a computer screen for 1 second. In the second task, one word at a time, a word

would appear upon a computer screen for 4 seconds. In the third and final task, one word at a

time, a word would appear upon a computer screen for an unlimited amount of time. During all

three tasks, participants were to think to themselves whether or not the noun described

themselves or their lives. Participants were to then participate in a quick distractor task and then

report as many words as they could remember in 45s. Immediately following those tasks,

participants were to report what strategy, if any, they used to help increase the amount of words
recalled. Unsworth (2012) hypothesized that the more time used in presenting the words, the use

of elaborate strategies should also increase.

The second goal of this study was to examine the relationship between WMC, LTM and

the ability to recall. In order to process that, participants took part in operation span task, reading

span task and symmetry span task. The operation span task consisted of participants solving sets

of math problems while trying to keep a specific set of 12 letters in memory. The reading span

task consisted of participants who were given the same 12 letter sequence that those in the

operation span task received. Participants in the reading span task were to read sentences and

report whether or not the sentences made sense, simultaneously to remembering those 12 letters.

The symmetry span task consisted of participants who were to recall series of red squares within

a matrix simultaneously to performing a symmetry judgment task. The symmetry judgment task

consisted of an 8x8 matrix for participants to examine and determine whether or not the matrix

was symmetrical about its vertical axis. Immediately following, participants were shown a 4x4

matrix with only one square filled in with red for 650ms. Unsworth (2015) concluded that the

greater amount of time the words appeared on the screen the greater amount of words were

correctly recalled.

Kuiper & Rogers (1979) also conducted a related study involving memory recall. They

aimed their focus on how an individual goes about providing information on themselves and

others. They believed this was a possible analysis. By examining the different memory traces

constructed by the judgments they and others contain about themselves, they hoped to ultimately

be able to describe the differences between the processing of those two different kinds of

judgment. To achieve this, Kuiper & Rogers (1979) did 5 experiments.

and received a list of 12 words. With those words they were to then complete four tasks; rate

whether or not a word described themselves or another, and rate whether the words were long or

short (structural) and if they had a specific meaning to them (semantic). It was concluded that

self-reference had the most words remembered.

Experiment 2 was done similarly to experiment 1, except participants were to rate

whether or not a word described themselves or the other-figure-representative, and rate the

structural and semantics of their ratings. Another difference would be that experiment 2

measured reaction time. It was concluded that it took more time to complete the other than the

self. Experiment 3 contained the same structure as experiment 2 minus the semantic and

structural task. The results concluded were the same as in experiment 1 and 2.

Experiment 4 was an exact replica of experiment 1, except it was done 11 months later

with the same participants and the other-figure-representative who was in experiment 1 to

examine if there would be an variances in their answers, thinking maybe participants would think

they knew the other-figure-representative more than they did previously. The results concluded

were the same as in all previous experiments.

In the fifth and final experiment, new participants were brought in who had the same

amount of exposure to the other to disqualify any outlying or bias data. Experiment 5 was ran the

same as experiment 1. The results concluded were the same as all previous experiments.

Studying and analyzing ways and conditions one performs a recall is a subject that is

constantly being examined, from King (2012) with his interest in how negative and positive

interactions affect recall of a specific decision and situation, Unsworth (2015) with his interest in
the relation between WMC, LTM, and memory recall, to Kuiper & Rogers (1979) interest in the

processes one goes through in order to distinguish what words relate to or describe themselves

and another. In this current study, we intend to relate our work to Kuiper & Rogers (1979),

making changes to how familiar one thinks they are to the other by using a well-known

controversial celebrity. Participants are to engage in the task individually, but with other

participants within the same room. The independent variables being whether the participants are

in the self-condition or the other condition. The dependent variable being the number of words

correctly recalled. The hypothesis is that those in the self-condition will recall more words than

those in the other condition.

Method

Participants

Materials

His study used a questionnaire that was designed by the researcher. The

questionnaire consisted of 34 words, in which each participant was to answer whether or not the

word applied to themselves (self-condition) or Miley Cyrus (other condition) and then rate their

confidence in their answer on a scale of 0 to 7. After completing that, participants were given a

hand out of math problems. Participants also received a blank sheet of paper to recall the words

onto. Lastly, particpants were asked to fill out their demographics and to rate how familiar they

are with Miley Cyrus and to rate their opinion of her on a scale of 0 to 7.

Procedure

Several time slots were made available for participants over the course of a week with a

different experimenter conducting each encounter. At the beginning of each session, participants
were instructed to seat themselves one person per table. Examiners then were to pass out consent

forms. After the consent forms were filled out and collected, participants were given the first task

in which instructed them to either rate whether or not the word applied to themselves or to Miley

Cyrus, based on their random selection between the two conditions, and to rate their confidence

in their answer on a scale of 0 to 7. Following the completion of that task, participants were

given a packet of math problems ranging in complexity and instructed to complete as many as

they could within three minutes. Afterwards, the examiner handed out a blank sheet of computer

paper and instructed to recall as many words as possible from the first task. Lastly, participants

filled out the demographics survey and were allowed to leave when it was all completed. Every

participant was given a specific participant number which was written on each separate task

sheet. Examiners were to then enter in their data into SPSS.

Results

The number of words correctly remembered, the participants confidence ratings on how

well the word described themselves or the non-self-representative (Miley Cyrus) and how

familiar the participants are to the non-self-representative was measured through an independent

samples t-test that also compared their results based on those who were in the self-condition to

those who were in the non-self-condition The t-test for equality of means proved to be

nonsignificant. Although, the hypothesis was not supported, in which there was not a significant

difference in words remembered between the two groups.

Discussion

The study was done to investigate the relationship between whether the participant was

evaluating themselves or a controversial other (Miley Cyrus) and the number of words recalled
correctly. Also, we wanted to evaluate the participants opinions on Miley Cyrus between the

two conditions, to see whether or not their opinions would be dependent on each condition or

not. Previous research, like Kuiper & Rogers (1979), state that those who are rating themselves

tend to correctly recall more words than those rating the non-self-representative and would also

be more confident in their descriptions if they were rating themselves. Our hypothesis was

similar. We theorized that those rating themselves would remember more words than those

placed in the Miley Cyrus condition. Also, those who rated themselves would give higher

confidence scores than those who were in the Miley Cyrus condition. There was a nonsignificant

difference in words correctly remembered between the two conditions, but those who rated

themselves did indeed remember more words. There was a significant difference between the

confidence ratings between the two conditions in which those who rated themselves were more

confident than those who rated Miley Cyrus. Also, there was a significant difference in the

participants opinion ratings between the two conditions. Those who were in the Miley Cyrus

condition did in fact display a higher opinion of her than those who were in the self-condition.

Factors that influenced this study could be related to, but not limited to, the mean age of

the sample, how much dedication was given by participants, lack of participants full focus

(whether internal or external), the place or origin of each participant, the complexity of the words

used, and their prior exposure to Miley Cyrus. These results do have a practical value. Our data

could serve as inspiration for another to replicate or take and make a few changes to create their

own study and then compare their findings.

If I could re-do the study, I would have a wider complexity of words so the complexity

can be measured. I would split the Miley Cyrus condition in half randomly and have one half

watch a video with a positive representation of Miley and the other half watch a video with a
negative representation of Miley. A day later, I would then give them the normal assessment

used for their condition and see if the videos effected words remembered, confidence ratings, and

their opinions of Miley. I would also try to get a wider representation of age and gender. I would

hope to find that those who watched the positive video would say positive words applied to her,

be more confident in their answers, and be able to recall the positive words they said applied to

her. For those who watched the negative video, Id suspect they would say negative words

applied to her, be more confident in their answers, and be able to recall the negative words they

said applied to her.

Another study that could derive from this is taking different types of individuals, those

with higher IQs, those within the upper quarter if their class compared to those in the lower

quarter, or even those diagnosed with ADHD or ADD, and then conduct the study to examine

whether those with a disorder and those thought to be smarter than others differ in words

remembered between the self and other condition differ from the current studies results. One

could even take and replicate the study and offer an incentive for half of those in each condition

prior to giving the assessment to examine if compensation changes their dedication or not.

Again, this study was done to evaluate how familiarity with the person one is rating

effects confidence ratings and number of words correctly recalled. Participants were randomly

assigned between two groups; the non-self-group and the self-group. Both groups were given a

questionnaire containing 34 words in which they were asked to rate on a scale of 1-7 whether or

not the word applied to themselves (self-condition) or Miley Cyrus (non-self-condition). When

finished with that, participants were instructed to answer as many math problems as possible

within three minutes. Proceeding that, participants were then given three minutes to recall as

many words as they could from the first task. We hypothesized that those rating themselves
would give higher confidence ratings and would remember more words than those rating the

non-self-representative. The hypothesis was supported by the results in which a nonsignificant

difference was found between the two conditions in reference to number of words remembered,

even though those in the self-condition did remember more words. A significant difference was

found between the two conditions in reference to confidence levels where those who rated

themselves were more confident in their answer than those who rated the non-self-representative.

In reference to human memory as a whole, this study, and all other similar existing studies would

agree that when examining ones own self, it tends to be easier to rate and apply which words

relate or describe ourselves and then later recall said words than it is to describe someone else we

feel we know but arent exactly sure. When rating another person, we spend too much time

thinking if the word applies or not, that when it comes to recalling the words as quickly as

possible, it becomes harder to pull words from the working memory.