Running head: EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 1

The Effects of External Stimuli on Working Memory Recall Tasks

Meghan Castellano, Marlee Cohen, Jenna ODonovan, Meenu Joseph, Marissa Pine, & Jaclyn

Spittler

Department of Speech-Language Pathology

Seton Hall University

GMSL7002AA Research Methods I

Fall 2016
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 2

Abstract

Purpose: To determine how outside stimuli affects one's working memory attention while

listening to a lecture in class.

Method: 20 graduate students completed two recall tasks, one with no stimuli and one with

visual and auditory stimuli (a video clip). They were given sets of 7 numbers and had to recall

them 30 seconds later.

Results: Participants recalled numbers better in the no stimulus task, recalling an average of 5.68

out of 7 numbers. In the dual stimuli task, participants recalled an average of 4.85 out of 7

numbers.

Discussion: Participants were better able to recall numbers after being presented with 30 seconds

of silence rather than a 30 second video clip.

Keywords: Working Memory, Graduate Students, External Stimuli, Recall

EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 3

Introduction

Within the 21st century, graduate programs have increased in competitiveness and

complexity. Graduate students are faced with an immense amount of pressures both in and out of

the classroom. The environmental stimuli of the classroom has transformed from strict note

taking to multiple stimuli that can interrupt the focus of students. The present study was aimed at

determining if the environment that students study in has a direct impact on his or her grades

within the graduate program.

Working memory plays an important role in the success of students within the

classroom. Graduate courses involve higher level cognitive functioning and attentional skills

which are also need to be constant components in their studying. According to Baddeley,

working memory is the processing of information that occurs at that moment. Baddeley's

working memory model is the theoretical framework that this study is based on. Additionally, the

working memory system is a limited capacity system, meaning that the working memory can

only hold a certain amount of information before it goes into overload and information

processing is interrupted. There are four subsystems: visuo-spatial sketchpad, phonological loop,

central executive and the episodic buffer (Baddeley, 2003).

The study aims to determine if recall through the phonological loop using subvocal

rehearsal or any other preferred strategy will increase or decrease the number of digits recalled

by the individuals when presented with outside visual and auditory stimuli. Phonological loop is

a temporary storage system concerned with verbal and acoustic information within Baddeley's

working memory model that encompasses a subvocal rehearsal system. The visuo-spatial

sketchpad is the subsystem that processes visual and kinesthetic information and encompasses

the ability to alter the images in one's mind. The episodic buffer is used when there is an
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 4

overload of information between the phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketchpad. The central

executive component is responsible for attention and long-term memory retrieval. The subvocal

rehearsal system is a strategy used to rehearse a series of items in one working memory before it

enters long-term memory. Digit recall is holding sequences of numbers in one's working

memory. The number of digits can range from zero to eight (Baddeley, 2003).

The current experiment being conducted is based on an idea explored in a study

conducted by Conners (2008) in which researchers performed an experiment where a child

listened to unrelated digits and tried to repeat the list every time they heard a new number. For

example, if they were told "5" the child would say "5." The examiner would then say "7" and the

child would say "5, 7." This was an adapted memory training task to be done with children with

Down Syndrome. The study found that auditory verbal memory span in children with Down

Syndrome improved due to this rehearsal strategy. Since participants in the current study being

conducted are typically developing adults the tasks were adapted to fit their cognitive level. They

were given all 7 digits at one time and expected to use their own strategies to be able to recall the

digits after a 30 second wait time period. Researchers presented digits auditorily to the subjects

and expected them to use subvocal rehearsal within the phonological loop in order to recall the

numbers presented at a later time.

Experimenters were looking to see how the environment stimuli impacted the recall

numbers after waiting a specific time period. This study can help determine the optimal

environment students need in order to retain information and increase their academic

performance. The goal was to simulate the classroom environment during this experiment by

expecting participants to recall information from working memory while there is a distracting

stimulus. It is hypothesized that graduate students will have better recall of numbers when there
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 5

are no background stimuli presented than when they are exposed to both visual and auditory

stimuli simultaneously. The specific research question is: Would recall of numbers be better

when graduate level students are presented with auditory and visual stimuli in the background

versus when there are no background stimuli presented?

Methods

Participants
Participants in this study were recruited as part of a research project for Research

Methods 1 in the School of Health of Medical Sciences at Seton Hall University. The 20

graduate students are currently enrolled at Seton Hall University for either Speech-Language

Pathology or Physical Therapy. Their age ranges from 22 years old to 27 years old. Additional

information about the participants background are recorded in Table 1 in the appendix.

Participants were included if their primary language was English and had no hearing

impairments or visual impairments. However, if vision was being corrected by contacts or

glasses they were able to be included. Exclusion criteria was if participants had a high-stress

level at the time of the experiment, a 3 on a 1-3 scale, or slept less than three hours the night

before. No participants were excluded from the analysis.

Procedures
Prior to beginning the experiment, the participant completed a questionnaire, seen in the

appendix Questionnaire 1, that included background information that could be used as exclusion

criteria. This information can be found in Table 1 (numbers represent amount of participants).

Each participant was identified through the last four digits of their phone number, which allowed

them to remain anonymous throughout the experiment. Once participants completed the

questionnaire, scripted instructions were read to them. A script was used in order to make sure
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 6

that the directions were given the same way to each participant and control for inter-rater

reliability.

In order to prevent background noise altering the results, participants were placed in an

environment that had reduced background sound. Each participant then completed four tasks

(two total trials); two under no stimuli followed by two under the dual stimuli environment. The

tasks consisted of repeating back numbers that were presented with stimuli and without stimuli.

There were two sets of numbers for both conditions and a time gap of thirty seconds after each

set was presented to the participant. All participants participated in both trials, no stimuli and

dual stimuli respectively, to ensure accurate results and keep consistency. Researchers used two

trails for dual stimuli in order to vary the stimulus that the participant was exposed to. Since dual

stimuli was performed twice the no stimuli condition was also performed twice to match the

number of trials.

During each task, individuals were given seven numbers to recall when prompted.

Numbers were used instead of words as a stimuli because students are exposed to numbers on a

daily basis and they are not program specific, which prevents any sort of bias based on the

individual's lexicon. These seven numbers were randomly generated by one experimenter, and

given via recording. For the no stimuli task, the first set of numbers was "5764839" and the

second set of numbers was "2349604." For the dual stimuli task the first set of numbers was

"8963768" and the second set of numbers was "9482905." By recording the numbers,

experimenters ensured that all participants received the stimuli in the same manner in each trial.

This increased fidelity and account for both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability.

For the no stimuli tasks, participants were asked to listen to the set of numbers, wait 30

seconds, and then verbally recall the numbers in the order that they heard. A timer was used to
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 7

determine when the 30 seconds was up. The participant was then prompted by the researcher,

"tell me the numbers." This was done for both sets. The data collector marked the amount of

numbers correct out of the seven that were given. The same procedure was done for the next

task (dual stimuli), but this time a 30-second clip was played on a computer. The same two

videos, a M & M's Mini Television Commercial from 1998 and a Lunchables Pizza Commercial

from 1996, were used for the two sets with dual stimuli. The amount of numbers recalled in both

of the tasks were recorded in an excel spreadsheet and then analyzed using SPSS to see if there

was a significant difference between conditions.

No Stimuli Tasks

Students participated in two trials for the no stimuli task. Participants were asked to

repeat two different sets of seven numbers (trials) each 30 seconds following them receiving no

stimuli, which was a period of silence.

Dual Stimuli Tasks

Participants were asked to repeat two different sets of seven numbers each after watching

a 30-second commercial. The commercial for trial 1 differed from trial 2. The same process of

finding the participants' averages was completed for the stimulus condition as stated in no stimuli

section.

Results

Analysis

The research question asked if external stimuli would affect recall of numbers. To answer

this question two conditions, no stimuli and dual stimuli, were compared. The dependent

variable is the amount of correct numbers that were recalled. Experimenters decided to find the

average amount of recalled numbers out of the seven that were given from the two sets of no
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 8

stimuli results and the two sets of dual stimuli results. For the no stimuli results, it was found

that the average amount of numbers recalled by the participants was 5.68 out of 7. For the dual

stimuli results, the average amount of numbers recalled was 4.85 out of 7. Table 2 provides

additional information about the results from both of these tasks.

Using SPSS, a Paired Samples T-Test was conducted to analyze the results comparing

these two means. It was found that a significant difference was present between the conditions

explored throughout the study, t(19) = 2.98, p = .05, with the advantage to the no stimuli tasks

having the better number recall. The mean from the paired samples test is .83 with a standard

deviation of 1.24. These results suggest that the hypothesis is correct and that the null hypothesis

can be rejected. This means that graduate school students recall numbers better when in silence,

or as close to it as possible, as opposed to when presented with dual stimuli.

Discussion

This study tested the working memory of graduate students with information that is well

known to everyone (numbers), however, it is unknown how auditory and visual distractions

would affect one's working memory when learning new information. This relates to graduate

students in the classroom because every day they are learning something new. Based on the

findings of recall with familiar information, outside stimuli may affect the learning of new

information more greatly. The purpose of this study was to determine how outside stimuli affect

one's working memory capability while listening to a lecture. The results found that participants

performed better with the recall of numbers when they were not distracted by outside stimuli.

When participants were not distracted by outside stimuli, they were able to rehearse the numbers

they heard in their heads and to recall more easily.

EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 9

According to Baddeley (2003) rehearsal influences learning which corroborates our

results. Within the model, an individual uses both the visuo-spatial sketchpad and the

phonological loop when presented with information. The episodic buffer is utilized when there is

an overload of information in the brain (Baddeley, 2003). The results suggest that participants'

episodic buffer component was not helpful when it came to recalling numbers when both

auditory and visual stimuli were presented. When the auditory and visual stimuli were presented,

participants experienced difficulty remembering the exact numbers that were given to them. This

could be due to an interruption in subvocal rehearsal because of the external stimuli impacting

the efficiency of their working memory system.

The null hypothesis states that there is no difference between the recall of numbers with

or without stimuli. The null hypothesis was rejected because a significant difference was found

when comparing the recall of numbers with no stimuli to dual stimuli (p<0.05). Therefore, the

hypothesis is correct. Many graduate students prefer to study information with background music

on, however, the findings suggest that this is not the ideal studying environment. These

individuals are exposed to numerous external stimuli within the classroom while listening to a

lecture, such as other students' talking or construction from outside.

Clinical Implications

Clinical implications found from our results include having a stimulus in the background

which an effect on working memory recall tasks. The findings suggest that there is an effect on

working memory when there is a stimuli versus when there is no stimuli. Participants had a more

difficult time recalling the sets of numbers when there was a stimulus presented. These results

suggest that when trying to attend to a lecture and recall what was being taught a student needs to

avoid outside stimuli for the information to register successfully. The findings obtained can be
EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 10

used for helping students to find the optimal environment to recall the information they have

learned in lectures. Working memory is an essential component for students' ability to retain and

recall information. This is useful in understanding the influence that working memory has on

graduate students' studying capabilities. This may further contribute to students' grades and

academic success through school. The findings obtained through this study may explain the

contributions to students' achievements and/or failures.

Limitations and Future Directions

A limitation in this study is that the participants involved only represented graduate

students in the health and medical field, which is not representative of the whole population. The

reduced number of participants used in this study make it a limited sample. In the future this

study could be conducted with a larger number of participants from various age groups and

backgrounds to see if our findings extend to a larger population.

Conclusion

Overall, these findings have determined that recalling numbers is more successful while

in silence (or as close to it as possible) than while presented with external stimuli. These results

have a clinical relevance to other graduate students and their learning environments including

learning and studying in the quietest possible environment. This is a useful technique to ensure

better recall of information.

EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 11

References

Baddeley, A. (2003, February 25). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of

Communication Disorders, 36, 189-208. doi:10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00019-4

Conners, F., Rosenquist, C., Arnett, L., Moore, M., & Hume, L. (2008, March). Improving

memory span in children with down syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability

Research, 52(3), 244-255. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2007.01015.x

Fast Forward Eats The Tape. (2016, January 1). M&Ms Mini Television Commercial 1998.

Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCkjocqRQJ8

Wiiffermadness. (2010, January 15). Lunchables Commercial (1996). Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmbE9x9WFqc
 EXTERNAL STIMULI AND WORKING MEMORY 12

Appendix

Questionnaire 1.
Participant Background Information
Background information on the participants within the study
Last 4 digits of Phone Number: __ __ __ __
Age:______
Gender: Male Female Other
Handed: Left Right Ambidextrous
What graduate program are you enrolled in: PT SLP
How do you study: Silence Background Music Background TV
Any vision impairments: No Yes, Aided (glasses or contacts) Yes, unaided (nothing)
Any hearing impairments: No Yes, Aided Yes, Unaided
How many hours of sleep did you get last night: 0-2 3-5 6-8 9-above
What type of learner are you: Visual Auditory Kinesthetic Read/Write Other:______
What is your primary language: English Other:________
Rate your stress level
(Lowdo not feel at all) 1 2 3 (Highhaving a breakdown)

Table 1. Descriptive variables

Gender Age Graduate program
Study habit Hours of sleep Type of learner Current stress level
Male: 8 M = 22.8 years old
SLP: 7 Silence: 9 3-5 hours: 5 Visual: 11 Low: 9
Female: 12 PT: 13 Music: 10 6-8 hours: 14 Auditory: 3 Moderate: 11
TV: 1 9+ hours: 1 Kinesthetic: 2 High: 0
Read/write: 4
*SLP= Speech-language pathology; PT= Physical therapy

Table 2. Overall average of 7 numbers recalled under all conditions

Condition Average Standard Standard Error
Deviation Mean
No Stim 5.675 1.13873 0.25463
Stim 4.850 1.51397 1.51397