Search for and view the following video: “Man without a Memory- Clive Wearing.”
Address, in a 50- to 70-word paper, the following question:
- How would you define the relationship between learning something and remembering it?Participants Data from 64 undergraduate UCLA students were col-
lected for this experiment. Data from three of these partic- ipants were excluded because they scored over two standard deviations above the mean on Remember false- alarm rate, leaving a final sample size of 61. This sample size was larger than Experiments 1 and 3, because of the need to increase statistical power to construct ROC curves. All participants received course credit for their participa- tion. We did not assess their English fluency or whether they participated in Experiment 1. However, the experi- ments were conducted in different academic quarters with a different composition of the subject pool, and thus it is highly unlikely that a subject participated in both experi- ments. Treatment of subjects was in accordance with the ethical standards of the UCLA Institutional Review Board.
Design, materials, and procedure The study procedure of Experiment 2 was identical to
the first experiment, with a different set of words used.
On the recognition test, participants were given the option of responding that they consciously ‘‘remember” the word from before, or if they did not consciously remember it, they gave a rating indicating how sure they were that they did or did not see the word before. Participants were informed about the definition of ‘‘remembering” using the instructions given in Experiment 1. For non- remembered items, the response options were: 1 ‘‘Defi- nitely NEW,” 2 ‘‘Probably NEW,” 3 ‘‘Maybe NEW,” 4 ‘‘Maybe OLD,” 5 ‘‘Probably OLD,” and 6 ‘‘Definitely OLD.” Because of the possibility that participants from Experi- ment 1 could be included in this study, a new word list was developed. The word list used in Experiment 2 list had very similar psychometric properties to the list used in Experiment 1: word-length was restricted to six letters and the HAL frequencies did not significantly differ between high-value words (M = 4746.67, SD = 442.92), low-value words (M = 4698.31, SD = 440.30), and distrac- tors (M = 4730.99, SD = 440.97), F(2,179) = 0.14, p = .866, g2 < 0.01. Likewise, the number of phonemes, morphemes, and part of speech did not differ significantly between these three item types (p > .372).
