i'm trying to find strengths to a deep processing vs shalow processing investigation
procedure:
1)class split in half
2)class given 10 mins to remember 24 words
3)each member given piece of paper to write down the words they could remember
4)results taken in
i can think of plenty of weaknesses but no strengths
weaknesses
'no cheating' rule wasn't enforced
can't generalise because different methods were used within each group.
sorry this doesn't help :(
You haven't provided enough information to find strengths.
From your description of procedure, I don't see a clear difference between the two halves. What were the different methods? How can you tell which are doing deep or shallow processing? Were they given different instructions?
The independent variable is given to the experimental group and not to the control group. How are the words presented? In written form? Orally? Is that the difference?
From your description, the only strength I see is the writing of the words as empirical data.
To identify strengths of a deep processing vs shallow processing investigation using the given procedure, we can analyze the experiment itself and consider the potential benefits it offers. Here are a few possible strengths:
1) Controlled conditions: The experiment was conducted in a structured environment where the participants were split into two groups. This controlled setup allows for a better comparison between the deep processing and shallow processing methods.
2) Reproducibility: The experiment can be replicated with other groups to assess the consistency of the findings. This reproducibility enhances the reliability of the results.
3) Measurable outcomes: The experiment utilized a specific measurement by asking participants to write down the words they could remember. This straightforward measurement can provide quantitative data for analysis.
4) Direct comparison: By splitting the class in half and providing different processing methods to each group, the experiment enables a direct comparison between deep processing and shallow processing without confounding factors.
5) Time efficiency: The experiment had a relatively short duration, with participants given only 10 minutes to remember the words. This time efficiency can be beneficial in terms of practicality and ease of implementation.
These strengths should be considered alongside the weaknesses you already mentioned to assess the overall suitability and reliability of the investigation.