METHODOLOGY

 HYPOTHESIS- The extent of learning that takes place will be greater under the
condition of intentional learning in comparison to incidental learning. 

 VARIABLES–   A variable is an entity that varies and can be measured, it takes on

different values (or changes) is called a variable. Variable maybe be manipulated,
observed or controlled. For e.g. income, weight, height etc. The types of variables
have been mentioned below. 

1. Independent Variable (IV)- 

Variables which are constantly manipulated are called as IV. It refers
to the events and conditions taken by the experimenter for
manipulation (systematically manipulated) in order to see the effects.
In this experiment, the nature of instructions given with respect to the
task are independent variables as they are being manipulated in both
the situations. 

2. Dependent Variables (DV)-

Variables which are observed and measured and are outcomes of the
manipulation of IVs are called as dependent variables. They are the
result of experimental intervention and their values are contingent on
the values of IV. 
In this experiment, in the very 1 situation the number of words
st

recalled correctly (accuracy) and time taken for recall (speed) are the
dependent variables. 

                  3. Control Variables- 

 Size and colour of the font kept constant
 The exposure time for each work was 5 seconds.
 Each word has shown one at a time.
 Meaning rating was kept 6 to 7 from Paivio et al list of words.
 Length of each word was kept at 6-8 letters for each word.
 The subject was made to read aloud each word.
 Both lists (one for incidental and one for intentional) were shown.
 Free recall was used at both conditions.
 Subjective variables like age, sex, intelligent level, etc. were kept
constant.
 Non-psychology student was taken.
 Noise level was kept at minimum level.
 It was ensured that the room where the conduction was going on
was properly lighted and ventilated.
 DESIGN 

The experiment would follow a within-subject design. There will be 2

conditions in the experiment. Incidental Learning Condition and
Intentional Learning Condition. 

In the first condition (Incidental), the experimenter will present a list of

15 words to the participant using a specially designed power point
presentation. The words would be chosen according to the rules
presented earlier. The exposure time for every word will be kept at 5
seconds. Each word will be shown one at a time and only once. No
instructions to learn the word will be given. However, the participant
will be asked to read the word aloud as it appears on the computer
screen along with performing the orienting task. The orienting task will
be to count the number of vowels in each word and to say the number
aloud. This will be noted by the experimenter. Example: REPLACE.
Here the number of vowels in the word are 3 (i.e. ‘E’, ‘A’, AND ‘E’).
This is the number to be said aloud. 

A rest pause of 3 minutes will follow. Thereafter, the second condition

i.e. Intentional Learning will begin. 

 DESIGN AT A GLANCE – 

   The table for design at a glance has been given below, stating both
the  conditions. 
CONDITION I CONDITION II

                                                                  
 List A : Rest pause = 3 minutes  List B:
Incidental Intentional
Learning Learning 
 15 words  15 words
with with
meaningfulne meaningfulne
ss rating 6-7 ss rating 6-7
 Length of from Paivio
words: 6-8 et al’s list of
words nouns
 Each word  Length of
should being words 6-8
with a letters
different  Each word
letter should begin
 Visual with a
presentation different
of words letter 
 One trial  Visual
 Duration of presentation
exposure 5 of words
seconds per  One trial
word  Duration of
 S’s task: read exposure 5
aloud each seconds per
word and word
answer the  S’s task: read
question that aloud each
 follows other and
 One memorize
immediate them in any
free recall  order 
 Words  One
recalled by immediate
the S to be free recall 
recorded on a  Time taken
recall slip for recall to
 Time taken be recorded 
for recall to  No feedback 
be recorded 
 No feedback

 PRECAUTIONS –
 Precautions maintained were related to 3 control variables: person,
situation, and variable related. 
 Precautions were taken to avoid interference in the cause and effect
relationship.
 All material was kept ready before the entry of the subject and
away from the participants view.
 It was made sure the smart phone as well as laptop were on flight
mode to avoid any disturbance during the conduction of the
experiment.
 Optimal Laboratory Conditions were maintained in a home setting:
Closed Room, quiet space with minimum noises, ventilation etc.
 It was also ensured that the subject was a non-psychology student.
 Adequate time for rapport formation (questions like how is she
doing, what are ambitions etc. to bring her at ease) was ensured.
 The subject was comfortably seated and was fluent in English
o Communication in order to avoid any language barrier. 
 The subject was restrained from touching/accessing the devices
which were used during conduction.
  The recall slip was given immediately after both the conditions. 
 No feedback (through verbal or physical cues) was given to the
subject during the conduction of the experiment.
 It was ensured that the participant was debriefed at the end.
 The word ‘learning’ was not used in front of the subject at least
before the conduction of the first condition. 
 It was also ensured that the instructions were clear to the subject by
giving an example.
 The stopwatch was kept away from the participant’s view.  

 RULES FOR LIST CONSTRUCTION- 

  In both the lists there should be 15 words and the words should not
be repeated.
 Paivio et al’s list of words have been used for preparing these two
list of words.
 The number of letters of each word should be between 6 to 8.
 Every word in the list should begin with a different alphabet.
 None of the words should rhyme with another word.
 The meaningfulness, concreteness and imagery value of each word
should be 6 to 7.
 The list should not contain two words from the same category.
 All words should be common noun.
 
 MATERIALS REQUIRED –
 Laptop containing the PPTs
 2 PPTs required for the conduction of experiment.
 Stopwatch
 Experimenter’s Datasheet
 2 recall slips
 Informed consent form
 Interview schedule
 Stationary 
 Screens 
 ARRANGEMENT OF MATERIAL- 
Screens were properly arranged in an ‘L’ shaped manner on the table
with the laptop placed in the center. Two stools were placed, one in
front of the laptop i.e. along the length if the table and the other along
the breadth of the table, since the participant was right handed. The
power point presentation was prepared and saved on the laptop. It was
checked before beginning of the experiment. The experimenter’s data
sheet and recall slips were prepared before-hand. All the material was
kept ready behind the screen, away from the subject’s view before
inviting her into the lab. The presentation was set in with the very first
slide which was ‘WELCOME TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
PSYCHOLOGY.’ 

 PRELIMINARIES-  
Name- Vandana Bhatnagar
Age- 33 years
Gender- Female
Education Qualification- BA in Hotel Management, PG in HRM
Date of conduction- 16.01.21
Time of conduction- 3pm 
Place of conduction- Home setting 
Mental and Physical condition of the subject- Mental health of the
subject has been shaky due to work load and stress in office. Though
 the subject was in sound mental state at the time of conduction of
experiment, felt secure in the environment. The physical condition of
the subject was good as of now. 

 RAPPORT FORMATION- 
The participant was brought into the home setting prepared, seated
comfortably and a brief conversation was carried out about the
weather, ambition of life, what does she likes to eat, the series she’s
interested in etc. in order to make her feel comfortable and at ease.
After she appeared and settled in, the informed consent form was given
to her. 

 INFORMED CONSENT –
When the participant appeared and settled, the informed consent form
was given to her to explain the rights she withholds as a participant.
She was told that it was a voluntary participation and that their identity
and results would be kept confidential. She was told that she could
know her results after the experiment was done. After she understood
the rights of a participant, she signed the informed consent form which
is attached here. 
 INSTRUCTIONS – 

 Instructions for condition I: Incidental Learning

a) You will be shown a list of words. Each word will appear on the
screen  one at a time.
b) Every word will be shown once. You just have to read every
word to yourself as it appears on the screen.
c) Count the number of vowels in every word and say the
number aloud. For e.g. REPLACE. Here the number of vowels
in the word is 3 ( i.e. ‘E’, ‘A’, & ‘E’). This is the number that
you have to say out loud.

Instructions for recall- On this slip of paper, please write down as

many words as you can recall in any order.

 Instructions for condition II: Intentional Learning

a) Now, you will be shown a list of words. Each words will
appear on the screen one at a time
b) Every word will be shown once. You have to read aloud
every word as it appears on the screen.
c) Try to learn as many words as you can.
d) At the end of the list, you will be asked to recall the words in
any order you like. 

Instructions for recall- On this slip of paper, please write down as

many words as you can recall in any order. 

 CONDUCTION- 
After proper arrangement of the material and the laboratory conditions,
the participant was asked to enter the lab and be seated.
A brief conversation was carried out with her to make her feel
comfortable and at ease. After she appeared and finally settled, she was
handed the informed consent form and was explained her rights as a
participant.
After she signed the informed consent form, instructions for the first
condition were given to her. An example was also given to ensure that
she had understood the instructions. She was then asked if the task
could begin. As the power point presentation advanced with the
display of words, he participant gave responses which were noted
down in the experimenter’s datasheet. After list I was shown, the
participant was asked to recall as many words as she could and write
them on a slip of paper. The stopwatch was started to record the time
taken for recall by her. 
 Then followed a rest pause of 3 minutes which was conversation
centered on the participant’s interests and hobbies. 

After the rest pause, instructions for the second condition were given.
After all the word were shown to her from list II, she was given a recall
slip to write down as many words as she was able to recall. Time taken
for recall was noted again.

The participant was then asked for and introspective report in which
she was specifically asked three questions:
  “Which list was easier to learn and why?”
  “What strategies did you use to learn words in both
lists? Why were you able to recall these particular
words from the first list?”
  “Do you think if you would have known that you were
required to learn the list I as well, you would’ve
recalled better?”
Further probing was done wherever necessary. The participant was
then debriefed and explained why deception was used. She was
thanked for her contribution in the experiment. 
 INTROSPECTIVE REPORT- The introspective report has been attached
below.
Interview questions
Q1. Were you surprised when you were asked to recall the words in the first list?
Subject’s answer: Yes, I was taken aback when I was aked to recall the words from the first
list.

Q2. Did you make any attempts to learn the list of words in the first list?
Subject’s answer: No, I was more focused on counting the number of vowels in the words
that were presented to me.

Q3. Did the task of counting vowels in the first list affect, in any way, your ability to recall
the list of words in the first one?
Subject’s answer: Yes it did. I also have a poor memory as it is.

Q4. When it came to learning words in the second list, did you use a particular strategy?
Subject’s answer: Yes, I connected the words presented to me to some things that were in the
room and also in my mind. I used association. I also repeated the words one after the other.

Experimenter’s Observation/ Observational Report

In the beginning, the subject was very slow and did not read the first two words aloud. Then
after he was probed/encouraged to do the task at hand, he began to say the words aloud and
the number of vowels as well. After he was done with the first list, he was very inquisitive as
to why he was being asked to count the vowels. He was told to take a rest pause and that
everything would be explained after the conduction of the experiment was over. The subject
easily understood the instructions of the second list and did not fumble doing what he was
asked to do. While learning the words of the second list, he kept repeating it to himself and he
was more focused. After the conduction, interview questions, and the introspective report was
written by him, it was explained to him that this was an experiment to see if intentional
learning was indeed better then incidental learning in terms of accuracy and speed, he
understood it and looked relieved.

RESULT AND ANALYSIS

The data for the experiment has been analyzed keeping in mind the 2 Dependent Variables of
the study, which were:
1. Number of words recalled correctly (accuracy)
2. Time taken to recall (speed)
 Table no. 1
Sl. Words Words Recalled Recall Slip Remarks
No.

1. Elephant ✓

2. Admiral ✗

3. Factory ✗

4. Temple ✓

5. Daffodil ✗

6. Window ✗

7. Rattle ✗

8. Library ✓

9. Poster ✓

10. Icebox ✓

11. Village ✓

12. Hospital ✗

13. Macaroni ✗

14. Umbrella ✓

15. Nectar ✗

Table no.1 represents the results obtained for the first condition (incidental learning
condition).
1. No. Of words recalled: 7/15
2. No. Of errors: none
3. Time taken for recall: 60 seconds

Table no. 2
Sl. Words No. Of Response of the Remarks
No. vowels subject
1. Elephant 3 3

2. Admiral 3 3

3. Factory 2 2

4. Temple 2 2 He gave the correct response after

giving the wrong one.
5. Daffodil 3 3

6. Window 2 2

7. Rattle 2 2

8. Library 2 2

9. Poster 2 2 He gave the correct response after

giving the wrong one.
10. Icebox 3 2

11. Village 3 3

12. Hospital 3 3

13. Macaroni 4 4

14. Umbrella 3 2

15. Nectar 2 2

Table no. 2 indicates the subject’s response towards the orienting task given during the
incidental learning condition.
 Table no. 3
Sl. Words Words Recalled Recall Slip Remarks
No.
1. Reptile ✓

2. Engine ✓

✗
3. Avenue

4. Garden ✓

✗
5. Diamond

✗
6. Palace

7. Infant ✓

✗
8. Trumpet

9. Magazine ✓

✗
10. Sunset

11. College ✓

12. Hairpin ✓

✗
13. Barrel

✗
14. Lemonad
e
 ✗
15. Vehicle

Table no. 3 represents the results obtained in the 2nd Condition (intentional learning
condition).

1. No. Of words recalled: 11/15

2. No. Of errors: none
3. Time taken for recall: 86 seconds (1 minute 26 seconds)

Table no. 4
Condition No. Of words % Of words Total time taken Avg. time taken
recalled recalled for recall (in per word (in
correctly correctly seconds) seconds)
Incidental 7/15 46.67% 60 8.57 seconds
Learning
Intentional 7/15 46.67% 58 8.28 seconds
Learning

Table no. 4 provides a comparison of the results obtained in both the conditions of the
experiment.

Table no. 5
Serial no. Of the items Items recalled in condition 1 Items recalled in condition 2
1,2,3 (primacy effect) 1 1,2
7,8,9 (middle effect) 8,9 7,9
13,14,15 (recency 14
effect)

Table no. 5 shows the occurrence of serial position

GRAPH 1:

Chart Title
8.6
8.55
8.5
8.45
8.4
8.35
8.3
8.25
8.2
8.15
8.1
incidental intentional

Column2

Graph 2: Average time taken per word (in sec) in both the conditions.

GRAPH 2:

Chart Title
8

0
INCIDENTAL INTENTIONAL

Column2
Graph 1. No. of words recalled correctly in both the conditions.

INTERPRETATION 
The aim of the experiment was to compare the outcomes of Incidental
Learning and Intentional Learning. The experiment followed within
subject design and had two conditions. In the 1 condition (incidental
st

learning) subject was presented with a list of words and asked to

perform an orienting tasks, no instructions were given to learn the list
of words. In the 2 condition (intentional learning) the subject was
nd

given specific instructions to learn the list of words. Thereafter the

result of both conditions were compared. For this purpose the two
approaches i.e. qualitative (introspective report, experimental
observation, interview questions) & quantitative (no. of words recalled,
time taken for recall) approaches were taken into consideration. 
While the conduction of the experiment, the subject was at peace and
looked calm, constantly paid attention to whatever was being shown
the screen. For the 1 condition he could only remember 7 of the words
st

as he was more focused on vowels rather than learning.  Also it took

her about 8.5 seconds per word to recall 7 words from the 1 situation
st

correctly. When she was asked to recall the words for the first
condition, it came out as a surprise to her as she was not expecting it
all. In the 2 condition, she could recall 7 words correctly and the time
nd

taken for recall per word was 8.2. In the 2 condition, subject tried to
nd

link with words with certain memories (strategy) in order to be able to

recall words correctly. For the 2 condition, she looked prepared and
nd

attentive as the instructions were clear to learn the list of words given
in any order. 

 DISCUSSION
The aim of the given experiment is to compare the outcomes of
incidental and intentional learning and know whether learning is better
under intentional or incidental learning condition. 
The experiment design used to investigate the two types of learning is
a within- subject design where the same subject is exposed to both the
learning conditions.
The results shown that in the 1 condition, 7 words were recalled
st

correctly while in intentional learning condition, 7 words were recalled

correctly. Thus we can say in regard to accuracy, intentional learning is
better. Also with regard to speed, performance in intentional learning
condition was better as time taken per word in the 1 situation was 8.5
st

while in the 2 condition is was 8.2.

nd

In incidental learning condition, since no instructions were given to

learn, it involves very shallow level of processing. On the contrary, in
intentional learning condition, a deeper level of processing is present.
In subject’s case, the recall in intentional learning condition was better
so her level of processing in the 2 condition was better and she used
nd

semantic association in the 2 condition. As the subject quoted in her

nd

introspective report, “when I was told to learn the words, I associated

them with certain memories.” 
1) RETRIEVAL CUES- For very well differentiated materials at least,
Retrieval rather than learning appears to be the crucial problem for
non-intentional learning. 
2) PRIMACY EFFECT- The participant showed strong primacy effect
in the intentional learning condition whereas, recency effect was
stronger in incidental learning condition. 
3) STRATEGIES USED IN LEARNING- 
Firstly, in terms of accuracy, the subject has performed better in
intentional learning i.e. recalling 7 words in the 2 condition.
nd

As mentioned in the introspective report, the subject used selective

attention in the intentional learning condition. It helped the subject in
remembering more in the 2 condition as she was attentive and more
nd

focused. 
4) INTENTIONAL LEARNERS ATTEMPT- 
Intentional learners attempt to complement learning by seeking
meaning. Intentionality leads to carrying out the processes of
organizing incoming information so that it relates more efficiently to
semantic memory. There are better organizational strategies too.
Although there is no mention of any organizational strategy used, it is
possible that the subject maybe have used some kind of organization.
5) LEVELS OF PROCESSING- 
According to levels of processing model by Gaik & Lockhart,
information that is more deeply processed or processed according to its
meaning rather than just the sound or physical aspects. Therefore, the
1 condition involves a very shallow level or processing whereas the 2
st nd

condition involves deeper level of processing of information also it

took the subject lesser time to recall it. 

6) RESISTANCE TO INTERFERENCE- 
A great deal of evidence suggest that non- intentional subjects are
more susceptible to interference effects, especially retroactive
interference than intentional subjects. Rather consistently, when
subjects are presented with a list of items and are then tested for free
recall, the non- intentional subjects perform as well as sometimes
slightly better than the intentional subjects on the final items of the list
but not in the early and middle items. 
 CONCLUSION 
After conducting the practical and careful consideration of results, we
can make out that the hypothesis proposed at the beginning of the
practical that the extent of learning that takes place will be greater
under the condition of intentional learning in comparison to incidental
learning has been proved to be correct. My subject did perform better
in intentional learning condition as compared to incidental learning
factors on a number aspects. The hypothesis as well as the experiment
proved to be successful and very informative and fun while
performing. 
 REFERENCE  
 Ciccarelli, S.K., White, N.J., & MISRA, G. (2017). Psychology, 5th

Edition. South Asian Edition. New Delhi; Pearson Education 

 Passer, M.W. & Smith, R.E. (2013). Psychology: The science of mind
and behavior, New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.4
 Singh, A.K. (1996). Tests, Measurements and Research Methods in the
Behavioural Sciences (2020 ed.) Bharati Bhawan ( Publishers and
th

Distributors). 
 Budiu, R. (2018, May 13). Between-Subjects vs. Within-Subjects Study
Design. https://www.nngroup.com/ . Retrieved January 19, 2020 from
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/between-within-subjects/ 
 Morgan, C. T., Rosen, J. W., Morgan, C. T., & King, R. A. (1975).
Study guide for Morgan and King Introduction to psychology: Fifth
edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.