Unit 2 practice test: Cognition

The spaced group studied for the same total time but remembered more four weeks later. Better long-term retention from spread-out practice is the spacing effect.

• The serial position effect: The serial position effect is about where an item sits in a list. Both groups studied the same list in the same order.
• The method of loci: The method of loci links items to places along an imagined route. Neither group was taught a memory strategy.
• The recency effect: The recency effect is better memory for the last items in a list, not for spaced sessions.
• Correct: The spacing effect: Right: The spaced group studied for the same total time but remembered more four weeks later. Better long-term retention from spread-out practice is the spacing effect.

The independent variable is what the researchers changed between groups: the timing of the sessions (massed or spaced).

• Correct: Whether the three study sessions were on one day or over three weeks: Right: The independent variable is what the researchers changed between groups: the timing of the sessions (massed or spaced).
• The number of Spanish words written correctly on the final test: That is the dependent variable, what was measured.
• The 30 Spanish words that both groups of tenth graders studied: The words were the same for both groups, so they were held constant, not varied.
• The four weeks between the last session and the final test: Both groups waited four weeks, so the delay was held constant.

Generalizability depends on who was studied. These were teenagers in one school; adults working full time may differ in age, schedule and prior learning, so the result may only partly apply.

• The study had 64 students, which is too small a sample to generalize from: Generalizing is about how the participants compare with the new population, not about sample size alone.
• Correct: The participants were tenth graders in one Texas school, unlike adults: Right: Generalizability depends on who was studied. These were teenagers in one school; adults working full time may differ in age, schedule and prior learning, so the result may only partly apply.
• The students were randomly assigned, so the results apply to learners of any age: Random assignment supports a causal claim within the sample. It does not make the sample like adults.
• The final test was given four weeks after the last session: The delay is part of the method, the same for both groups. It does not describe who the participants were.

For minors, researchers need a parent's informed consent and the young person's assent. The summary says both were obtained, and a review committee approved the study.

• Debriefing after a cover story about the true purpose: The summary describes no deception and no debriefing.
• Payment to each student for each of the study sessions: No payment is mentioned, and payment is not itself a safeguard.
• Correct: Parental permission plus each student's own agreement: Right: For minors, researchers need a parent's informed consent and the young person's assent. The summary says both were obtained, and a review committee approved the study.
• Random assignment of students to the two study schedules: Random assignment is a design feature, not an ethical guideline.

Being reminded of a negative stereotype about one's group lowered test performance. That is stereotype threat.

• Stereotype lift: Stereotype lift is a small boost from being compared with a group stereotyped as worse. Here performance went down.
• Correct: Stereotype threat: Right: Being reminded of a negative stereotype about one's group lowered test performance. That is stereotype threat.
• The Flynn effect: The Flynn effect is the rise in average test scores across generations. This study compared two groups on one day.
• Test-retest reliability: Reliability is about consistent scores on repeated testing. Each woman took the test once.

Statistical significance means the difference between the groups is unlikely to be due to chance (random variation in who was in each group). It does not say the difference is large.

• The difference is large enough to matter in everyday life: Significance is not size. How big a difference is, is a separate question (effect size).
• Each woman in the reminder group scored lower than each woman in the other group: The groups overlap a lot (the SDs are about 3 questions). Significance is about the group averages.
• Correct: A difference this large would be unlikely if chance alone were at work: Right: Statistical significance means the difference between the groups is unlikely to be due to chance (random variation in who was in each group). It does not say the difference is large.
• The result will be found again by any lab that repeats the study: A significant result can still fail to replicate; only repeated studies show that.

When a study uses deception, researchers must explain the truth afterward. The summary says every participant was told the true purpose and that neither statement was a real finding.

• Random assignment: a computer placed each woman in a group: Random assignment is a design step for causal claims, not an ethical safeguard.
• Confidentiality: the test scores were stored without any names: The summary does not describe how scores were stored.
• Protection from harm: the math test lasted twenty minutes: The test length is part of the method, not a protection described as such.
• Correct: Debriefing: afterward each woman learned the statements were false: Right: When a study uses deception, researchers must explain the truth afterward. The summary says every participant was told the true purpose and that neither statement was a real finding.

Generalizing is judged by participant characteristics. Like the target group, they were female math students; unlike it, they were college students who had all taken calculus, at two universities.

• Correct: Partly: they were female math students, but older and in college: Right: Generalizing is judged by participant characteristics. Like the target group, they were female math students; unlike it, they were college students who had all taken calculus, at two universities.
• Fully, because 120 women is a large enough sample: Sample size alone does not show the participants resemble high school girls.
• No, because the study was a true experiment: Being an experiment supports a causal claim; it does not by itself prevent generalizing.
• Fully, because the women were randomly assigned to groups: Random assignment supports cause and effect within the sample. It does not make the sample like high school girls.