This article provides a detailed example of an IB Psychology Internal Assessment (IA) focusing on cognitive psychology. It outlines the research question, methodology, data analysis, and discussion, highlighting key considerations for students undertaking their own IAs. Remember, this is an example and should not be copied directly; you must design your own original investigation.
Research Question: Does Elaborative Interrogation Lead to Better Recall Than Rote Repetition?
This research question investigates the effectiveness of two distinct learning techniques: elaborative interrogation and rote repetition. It focuses on the cognitive processes involved in memory encoding and retrieval.
Rationale:
The rationale for this study stems from the well-established cognitive psychology principle that deeper levels of processing lead to better memory retention (Craik & Lockhart, 1972). Elaborative interrogation, which involves actively generating explanations for new information, represents a deeper level of processing than rote repetition, which involves simple rehearsal. This IA aims to empirically test this theoretical difference.
Methodology:
Participants:
A sample of 20 participants (10 male, 10 female) aged 16-18 were recruited from the school's IB Psychology class. A convenience sampling method was employed. The sample size is relatively small, a limitation acknowledged in the discussion.
Materials:
- A list of 20 unrelated English words (e.g., table, cloud, bicycle, etc.)
- Two sets of instructions: one for the elaborative interrogation group and one for the rote repetition group.
Procedure:
Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups (n=10 per group):
- Elaborative Interrogation Group: Participants were instructed to read each word and generate a personal explanation relating the word to their existing knowledge. For example, for the word "cloud," a participant might explain, "Clouds are formed by water vapor condensing in the atmosphere, and their appearance can indicate changes in weather patterns."
- Rote Repetition Group: Participants were instructed to read each word aloud five times.
After studying the word list for five minutes, participants completed a free recall test, where they were asked to write down as many words as they could remember in any order.
Data Analysis:
The number of correctly recalled words was recorded for each participant. Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) were calculated for each group. An independent samples t-test was used to compare the mean number of words recalled between the two groups. The results showed that the elaborative interrogation group recalled significantly more words (M = 12.5, SD = 2.1) than the rote repetition group (M = 7.8, SD = 1.9), t(18) = 4.2, p < .001.
Discussion:
The results support the hypothesis that elaborative interrogation leads to better recall than rote repetition. This finding aligns with the levels of processing theory, suggesting that deeper processing during encoding enhances memory retrieval.
Limitations:
- Small sample size: The small sample size limits the generalizability of the findings. A larger, more diverse sample would strengthen the study.
- Convenience sampling: The use of convenience sampling may introduce bias, as the participants are all from the same class.
- Artificial task: The word list recall task is an artificial setting and may not fully reflect real-world learning scenarios.
Suggestions for Future Research:
Future research could investigate the effectiveness of elaborative interrogation with different types of learning materials (e.g., prose passages, visual stimuli). A larger and more representative sample would also be beneficial. Furthermore, exploring the influence of individual differences (e.g., learning styles, prior knowledge) on the effectiveness of these learning techniques would add valuable insights.
Conclusion:
This IA provides a clear example of how to conduct a simple experiment within the constraints of the IB Psychology Internal Assessment. It demonstrates a well-defined research question, appropriate methodology, robust data analysis, and a thoughtful discussion of limitations and future research directions. Remember to adapt this structure to your own research question and ensure ethical considerations are addressed throughout your investigation. Good luck!
