Investigating The Interaction Of Reader Perspective And...

200PY - Research Practical Report Assignment Part 1: RP2 Research Practical 2: To investigate the interaction of reader perspective and relevance on item recall. Objective The aim of the study was to achieve replication of Pichert and Andersen’s (1977) study. Pitchert and Andersen’s conducted a study in which they asked participants to read a story and after participants were given different perspectives from which they could recall it, they were either homebuyer or the burglar perspective or none at all. 2 hypotheses were gatheredfor this study; the 1st was Burglar perspective participants will recall more burglar items than house buyer perspective participants will and the 2nd was House buyer perspective participants will recall†¦show more content†¦A distractor task (counting triangles) was undertaken after participants were asked to recall as much of the story as possible after which they were scored then the students were debriefed. 174 Students participated in the study. The study sample was randomly assigned to two independent groups. Results The results of this study showed that those participants that were recalling valuable items scored higher than the participants that were recalling household items. The test assumption indicated that Mauchly’s test was not violated X2 (0) = .000, p.05. This is because there are two covariances. A 2 (perspective: housebuyer/burglar) x 2 (perspective revelance: household items/burglar items) between subjects ANOVA was performed on the data. The main effect revealed that the recalled item scores differed significantly over the two perspectives, F(1, 175) = 128.83, p .001 From the data collected a significant difference can be seen in the group’s scores particularly in performance avoidance skills. But to make sure we have analysed this correctly a post hoc test was performed to find out exactly where the differences were. The homogeneity variance assumption was tested to see whether the variance of the scores are the same for the three groups, the significance is greater than 0.05. The significance was 0.70. The homogeneity variance was not violated it and the assumption has been proved. Because there is a significant difference between the groups, we