1

Levels of Processing

Krishnan. Shreya

Department of Psychology, Christ University (Kengeri Campus)

BPSY 152: Experimental Psychology

Dr Vijay M

10th October 2023

 2

Introduction

The levels of processing model (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) focus on the depth of

processing involved in memory, and predicts the deeper information is processed, the longer

a memory trace will last.

Craik defined depth as, “the meaningfulness extracted from the stimulus rather than in

terms of the number of analyses performed upon it.” Unlike the multi-store model, it is a non-

structured approach. The basic idea is that memory is really just what happens as a result of

processing information. Memory is just a by-product of the depth of processing of

information, and there is no clear distinction between short term and long-term memory.

Therefore, instead of concentrating on the stores/structures involved (i.e., short term memory

& long-term memory), this theory concentrates on the processes involved in memory.

Shallow Processing

1. Structural processing (appearance) which is when we encode only the physical

qualities of something. E.g., the typeface of a word or how the letters look.

2. Phonemic processing – which is when we encode its sound.

Shallow processing only involves maintenance rehearsal (repetition to help us hold

something

in the STM) and leads to fairly short-term retention of information.

This is the only type of rehearsal to take place within the multi-store model.

Deep Processing

1. Semantic processing, which happens when we encode the meaning of a word and

relate it to similar words with similar meaning.

2. Deep processing involves elaboration rehearsal which involves a more meaningful

analysis (e.g., images, thinking, associations etc.) of information and leads to better

recall.
 3

For example, giving words a meaning or linking them with previous knowledge.

Summary

Levels of processing: The idea that the way information is encoded affects how well it is

remembered. The deeper the level of processing, the easier the information is to recall.

This explanation of memory is useful in everyday life because it highlights the way in which

elaboration, which requires deeper processing of information, can aid memory. Three

examples

of this are.

• Reworking – putting information in your own words or talking about it with someone else.

• Method of loci – when trying to remember a list of items, linking each with a familiar place

or route.

• Imagery – by creating an image of something you want to remember; you elaborate on it

and

encode it visually (i.e., a mind map).

The above examples could all be used to revise psychology using semantic processing (e.g.

explaining memory models to your mum, using mind maps etc.) and should result in deeper

processing through using elaboration rehearsal.

Critical Evaluation

Strengths

The theory is an improvement on Atkinson & Shiffrin’s account of transfer from STM to

LTM.

For example, elaboration rehearsal leads to recall of information than just maintenance

rehearsal. The levels of processing model changed the direction of memory research. It

showed that encoding was not a simple, straightforward process. This widened the focus from
 4

seeing long-term memory as a simple storage unit to seeing it as a complex processing

system.

Craik and Lockhart's ideas led to hundreds of experiments, most of which confirmed the

superiority of 'deep' semantic processing for remembering information. It explains why we

remember some things much better and for much longer than others.

This explanation of memory is useful in everyday life because it highlights the way in which

elaboration, which requires deeper processing of information, can aid memory.

Weakness:

Despite these strengths, there are a number of criticisms of the levels of processing theory:

However, recent studies have clarified this point - it appears that deeper coding produces

better

retention because it is more elaborate. Elaborative encoding enriches the memory

representation of an item by activating many aspects of its meaning and linking it into the

pre-

existing network of semantic associations.

Later research indicated that processing is more complex and varied than the levels of

processing theory suggests. In other words, there is more to processing than depth and

elaboration.

For example, research by Bransford et al. (1979) indicated that a sentence such as, 'A

mosquito

is like a doctor because both draw blood' is more likely to be recalled than the more

elaborated

sentence, 'A mosquito is like a racoon because they both have head, legs and jaws'. It appears

that it is the distinctiveness of the first sentence which makes it easier to remember - it's

unusual
 5

to compare a doctor to a mosquito. As a result, the sentence stands out and is more easily

recalled. Another problem is that participants typically spend a longer time processing the

deeper or more difficult tasks. So, it could be that the results are partly due to more time

being spent on the material. The type of processing, the amount of effort & the length of time

spent on processing tend to be confounded. Deeper processing goes with more effort and

more time, so it is difficult to know which factor influences the results. The ideas of 'depth'

and 'elaboration' are vague and ill defined (Eysenck, 1978). As a result, they are difficult to

measure. Indeed, there is no independent way of measuring the depth of processing. This can

lead to a circular argument - it is predicted that deeply processed information will be

remembered better, but the measure of depth of processing is how well the information is

remembered.

The levels of processing theory focuses on the processes involved in memory, and thus

ignores

the structures. There is evidence to support the idea of memory structures such as STM and

LTM as the Multi-Store Model proposed (e.g., H.M., serial position effect etc.).

Therefore, memory is more complex than described by the LOP theory.

 6

Levels of Processing

Experimenter’s name: SPC Experiment number: 4

Subject: SK Date: 5 th September

2023

Aim: To demonstrate that accuracy of recall differs based on the level at which information

was processed

Problem: To study the effect of different levels of processing on recall of material.

Hypothesis: Recall is higher at deeper level of processing

Variables

 Independent variables: The orientation task- two levels. Surface level & deeper level

 Dependent Variables: Recall of words

 Confounding variables:

1. Method of Presentation

2. Recency effect

3. Fatigue & distraction

4. Time of exposure

Design and Plan:

With in the subject design with randomized presentation of the series. The subject is

presented with two orienting tasks involving the subject to decide whether words presented

on a set of cards are in upper case and lower case. The second task involved the subject to

decide whether the words presented on a second set of cards fit into a sentence or not. After

the orientating tasks, a 5 mins pause is given and the subject is asked to recall all the words

he/she saw.

Materials Required:

1. Two set of cards -each with a stimulus word on one side and the orienting task on the
 7

other. The first set of stimulus words are printed in “upper/lower case” , which may or

may not corresponds to the actual printing of the stimulus word. The second set of

cards

has a sentence with a blank space on one side and the stimulus word on the other. The

stimulus word may or may not complete the sentence. on the other.

2. Four example cards

3. List of stimulus words for verification (key)

4. Stop clock.

5. Writing materials

6. Wooden screen

Precautions:

1. In each series, the cards re shuffled to ensure random presentation.

2. Each word is exposed for the same amount of time (6 seconds for the stimulus word

and 3 seconds for the orienting task.)

3. The series are randomly presented for each subject

4. A rest pause of 5mins is given after the two orienting tasks and before the recall to

avoid

recency effect.

5. A rest pause of one minute is given between each series and a five-minute pause

before recall to combat fatigue.

6. Distraction of any nature is kept to minimum level.

7. The subject should be unaware that a recall task will follow the orienting task.

8. The subject should be unaware that a recall task will follow the orienting task.

9. Instructions and examples should be clear.

 8

10. The experimenter must pretend to note down the responses for each orienting task to

avoid cueing the subjects.

 9

Procedure:

The subject is seated comfortably in a quiet room at the table of comfortable/ suitable

height. A screen, to avoid pre-exposure of the cards, is used. Rapport is built with the subject

to put him/ he at ease. The subject is given the data sheet and is requested to fill the

background

information. The experiment enter notes the data and time of experimentation.

Surface level (Physical processing)

The experimenter selects the cards with “upper case” and “lower case” printed on

them.

He/she instructs the subject that he/she has decided whether the stimulus word is in “upper

case” or in “lower case”. the experimenter shuffles the cards thoroughly and presents them

using the flash card technique. Each card is presented with the orienting task first for three

seconds or till the response is obtained, whichever comes earlier. After all the cards are

exposed, the subject is given a rest pause of one in and the experimenter proceeds to the next

series.

Deep level (Semantic processing)

The experimenter selects the cards with sentences and instructs the subject that he/she

has to decide whether the stimulus words fills the blank in orienting tasks for 3 seconds or till

response is obtained, After all the cards are exposed to the subject, he/she is asked to recall all

the stimulus words and write them down.

Instructions:

Surface level (Physical processing)

“You will be shown a set of cards one at a time. In this set each card will have either the word

“Upper case” or “Lower case” written on it. Behind each word will be another word which is

the stimulus word. You have to decide whether the stimulus word is in the case that matches
 10

the orienting task or not. For example, the first may have the “upper case and the stimulus

word may be printed in “lower case”, Here your response should be “NO”. The second card

may also have upper case and the stimulus word may be printed in upper

case. In this case, your response should be “yes” and so on. Have you understood the task?

(Clarify any doubts at this stage), Can we begin now?

Deep level (Semantic processing)

You will be shown a set of cards one at a time. In this set each card will have a sentence with

a blank similar to a fill in the blanks. On the blank of the card, the stimulus word that may or

may not actually fill the blanks is given.

You decide whether the stimulus word fill the blank in the first sentence or not. For example,

the first card may have the sentence, “Roses are __________ in colour”; on it and

the stimulus word may be “new”. Here your response should be “No”.

The second card may have, “A __________ is a man’s best friend”. On the one side and the

stimulus word may be “Dog”. In those case, your response should be “yes” and so on.

Recall task:

After the second series, the subject is given a 5 minutes rest pause and then given the

instructions for recall task which is:

“Please try to recall all the stimulus words from all the series in any order”.

Recording of data:

The number of stimulus words recalled in each series is noted down.

Analysis of data:

1. The number of words correctly recalled by the subject. In each series is calculated.

2. A bar graph is drawn showing the number of words correctly recalled to each level of

processing.
 11

3. The average number of words correctly recalled in each series by the group is

calculated.

4. A bar graph is drawn showing the average number of words correctly recalled by the

group for each level of processing.

Table 1

Number of words correctly recalled by the subject in different levels of processing

Name Physical (Surface) Deep (Semantic) Difference

Level Level
SK 13 15 2

Graph 1

Number of words correctly recalled by the subject in different levels of processing

15.5

15

14.5

14

13.5

13

12.5

12
Physical (Surface) Level Deep (Semantic) Level
 12

Table 2

Number of words correctly recalled by the group in different levels of processing

Sn.O Name Physical (Surface) Deep (Semantic) Difference

Level Level
1. YD 15 13 2
2. AC 6 6 0
3. CH 8 12 4
4. AG 6 10 4
5. DM 13 10 3
6. MRM 12 10 2
7. VM 14 7 7
8. SKB 10 10 4
9. AM 8 8 4
10. BRC 10 10 7
Total 102 96 37
Mean 10.2 9.6 3.7

Graph 2

Mean of number of words correctly recalled by the group in different levels of processing

10.3

10.2

10.1

10

9.9

9.8

9.7

9.6

9.5

9.4

9.3
Physical (Surface) Level Deep (Semantic) Level
 13

Individual discussion:

The aim of the experiment is to study the effect of different levels of processing on the recall

of the material.

The experiment was conducted on subject SK doing her under graduation in psychology, in

Christ University. Table 1 shows, the number of words recalled in physical and semantic level

by the subject. The number of words recalled by the subject under physical level in 13 and in

semantic level 15, the difference is (-2).

Thus, the subject confirms the hypothesis as the recall is higher in semantic/deeper level of

processing.

Group Discussion

The experiment was conducted on a heterogenous group, doing their Bachelor’s degree in

Christ University, Kengeri

Table 2 shows, the number of words recalled in physical and semantic level by the group. The

number of words recalled by the group under physical level in 102 and the mean is

10.2 and in semantic level 96 and the mean is 9.6, the difference is 37 with of mean of 3.7.

Thus, the group also confirms the hypothesis, as the recall is higher in semantic level of

processing.

Conclusion:

1. The subject results prove the hypothesis/ does not proves the hypothesis which says

that the recall is higher in the semantic level of processing.

2. The group results prove the hypothesis/ does not proves the hypothesis which says

that the recall is higher in the semantic level of processing.

3. Individual difference exists.