|
Type of selected items |
Percentage of recalls |
|
In original list |
57.142857 |
|
Normal distractor (not in list) |
0.0 |
|
Special distractor (not in list) |
100.0 |
|
Type of selected items |
Percentage of recalls |
|
In original list |
66.666664 |
|
Normal distractor (not in list) |
0.0 |
|
Special distractor (not in list) |
83.333336 |
According to the original hypothesis the participant should have had an improved score on the second trial after completing trial one, there was no drastic difference in the scores of each trial. The percentage of recalls of the special distractor did not decrease by a drastic number after the first trial. In only one trial did the participant not recall the special distractor. The participantŐs recall of words in the list did increase by almost 10%, but that number is of no real significance because the participant failed to discard the special distractors in both trials. The study found a significant number of false memories in both trial #1 and trial #2. The affect of learning did not have a significant effect on the results of the second trial; the participant was successful in discarding only one of the special distractors in the second trial.