ANDRADE STUDY

Aim, Background, Research Method

100

What was the aim of the study?

To find out whether doodling assisted information processing by increasing attentiveness or by enhancing memory.

200

What type of experiment is this? And where was it conducted?

Laboratory Experiment at Plymouth University

300

What was the Research Design? IV and DV?

Independent Measures

IV: Doodling

DV: Memory Recall

400

What was the psychology being investigated?

How cognitive processes like memory can be influenced by doodling and focusing concentration

500

What is the background of the study?

Research shows we perform less when our attention is divided. However, doodling might aid concentration.

Sample

100

How many participants? Age?

40 participants ages 18-55

200

How were they split into groups? Gender?

Doodling: 20 participants(18 females, 2 males)

Control: 20 participants(17 females, 3 males)

300

What type of sample was it?

Opportunity

400

How were they recruited?

They had just completed participating in a study and were about to go home when they were asked if they could spare 5 minutes in Andrade's study.

500

How were the participants allocated into groups?

Randomly allocated into groups

Procedure

100

What was the monitored information and what was the recall task?

Monitored: Names of partygoers

Recall: Names of places

200

Explain the telephone call

It was a dull telephone call that lasted 2.5 minutes. It stated 8 names of partygoers, 3 names of people not attending, 1 cat not attending, and 8 names of places

300

Describe the A4 paper

A4 sheets were given to participants in the doodle group with alternating rows of squares and circles, ten per row. It had a wide margin (4.5 cm) on the left to record targeted information.

400

What were false alarms and mishearings?

False alarm: Naming non-party-goers

Mishearing: Confusing names i.e. Craig instead of Greg. Marked correct.

500

Explain the procedures

• Participants were recruited after finishing an unrelated experiment, enhancing the boredom factor by testing individuals already thinking about going home.
• They were tested individually in a quiet and visually dull room.
• The task involved listening to a monotonous mock telephone message about a party, including names of attendees and non-attendees, and place names, along with irrelevant material.
• The control group wrote down the names of people definitely or probably coming to the party on lined paper.
• The doodling group shaded in printed shapes (squares and circles) on a response sheet while listening. The task was designed to be simple, encouraging a degree of absent-mindedness akin to naturalistic doodling.
• Participants engaged in a conversation for a minute, including a disclosure about the upcoming memory test.
• They were then asked to recall names of party-goers and places, with the order of recall counterbalanced across participants.

Results and Conclusions

100

What were the results for the Doodling Group?

Doodling group:
- 7.8 correct names
- 2.6 correct places
- 1 false alarm

200

What were the results for the Control Group?

Control group:
- 7.1 correct names
- 2.1 correct places
- 5 false alarm

300

What is the conclusion?

Doodling helps concentration on a primary task as doodling participants performed better than participants who only listened to the primary task.

400

What are the two possible explanations?

Either doodling affected attention or doodling improved memory by encouraging deeper information processing

500

Did they measure daydreaming? Explain how this affects the study

No, they didn't. Without a measure of daydreaming, it is difficult to distinguish between the 2 explanations. It also decreases the validity of the experiment as it doesn't exactly test what it needs to. 

Strengths and Weaknesses

100

One strength in Ethics and One weakness

Strength:

Debriefing

Apologized to by the researchers

No physical or psychological harm

Weakness:

No informed consent for the recall task

200

One strength in Generalizability and One weakness.

Strength:

Wide age range

Weakness:

Mostly female participants

300

One strength in Applicability and One weakness

Strength:

Classrooms

Lectures

Weakness:

Deliberately drawing something might be counterproductive.

400

One strength in Validity and One weakness.

Strength:

Same monotonous recording was used for both groups

The operationalism of doodling was standardized by using A4 sheets

Counterbalancing

Weakness:

Low ecological validity

All from a recruitment panel, possible bias

500

One strength in Reliability and One weakness.

Strength:

Lab experiment

Standardized procedures

Weakness:

Low mundane realism