1

Introduction

Within the last decade, the study of imagination, memory, and consciousness has sparked

considerable investigation in cognitive geropsychology. Implicit memory and explicit memory are two

dissociable memory tasks that reveal the nuances of cognitive aging from both a behavioral and a

neurological perspective. For instance, Anooshian(1997), Carroll, Byrne, & Kirsner (1985), Ellis, Ellis, &

Hosey (1993), Greenbaum & Graf (1989), Lorsbach & Morris (1991), Lorsbach & Worman (1990), Naito

(1990), and Parkin & Streete (1988) showed very few age differences for implicit memory tasks; however

explicit memory tasks did reveal age-related memory declines. Explicit memory is deemed more of a

necessity for human survival than implicit memory because this type of memory enhances the formation

of cognitive networks (Baddeley, 1998). Heightened activity of the prefrontal lobe and strengthening of

associative memory is related to the compensatory mechanisms of working memory during aging

memory processes. Two prime facets of associative memory are deep/shallow levels of processing

effects, and subliminal/supraliminal factors. To obtain a clearer picture of the compensatory

mechanisms used to preserve aging memory processes, I will analyze the influence of these specific

associative memory processes on explicit memory test performance in aging adults.

Definitions and uses of explicit memory tests

Explicit memory tests measure the conscious recollection of memory of previously presented

stimuli (Joyce, Paller, McIsaac, & Kutas, 1998). When one performs well on an explicit test, he or she has

brought factual knowledge to their awareness. The explicit memory test stimuli can be presented

visually, pictorially, or aurally (Drury, Kinsella, & Ong, 2000). Recall and recognition are two main types

of explicit memory tests used by the research community.

Distinctions between Supraliminal and Subliminal Memory Processes

Supraliminal memory processes are driven by strong feelings of recollection of events that

enhance one’s ability to visualize the scene. Subliminal processes depend upon feelings of familiarity

2

without remembering an actual event. Many theories have been presented to explain the differences

among two cognitive processes, model based and task based separations. For my experiment, task

based separation offers the best explanation. Task based separation uses cued and free recall direct

tests to analyze supraliminal memory processes. Moreover, the theory uses stem completion, an

indirect test, to examine these cognitive factors. Within the task separation procedure, both direct and

indirect tests are administered presenting participants with a list of either words or pictures. The

participants are instructed to complete the free recall or cued recall, word-fragment, picture-fragment

or word completion tasks (Mandler, 1980).

The Influences of both Supraliminal and Subliminal Memory Processes

Mixed tests are influenced by both processes (Mandler, 1980). Tulving cited in Brainerd et al.,

1998) uses the remember-know procedure that gives participants a recognition test asking them to

reject unstudied words and accept studied words. Additionally, participants are asked to place a

judgment on their level of familiarity or recollection of each word they accept. However, indirect and

direct tests may not be true measures of respective memory processes (Jacoby, 1996). The

experimental model may be contaminated by the indiscernible effects of the simultaneous thought

processes.

Jacoby, Toth, and Yonelinas (1993) used exclusion tasks such as word-stem completion and

forced-choice recognition to study these dissociable cognitive processes. The researcher instructed the

participant to suppress memories of the original word list during the testing phase. The participants’

success in not responding with words from the original list shows the strength of their conscious control

abilities. However, their failure to “exclude” the words from the original list reveals their reliance on

automaticity.

To further elucidate unconscious and conscious memory differences, Postma et al. (2008) told

Korsakoff patients to place pictures displayed on a computer screen in their appropriate physical

3

locations. Then, the researcher instructed the patients to memorize each object’s proper location. In

the “include” condition, the patients placed half of the target objects in their appropriate location.

During the “exclude” condition, the patients placed half of the objects in a different location from the

memorized location. In the include condition, conscious and unconscious processes complement each

other while in the exclude condition, conscious and unconscious processes stymie each other.

Moreover, Caldwell & Masson (2001) further evidences age related declines in conscious recall of object

location tasks while unconscious processes were preserved.

The relationship between levels of processing theory and conceptual memory

In the advent of cognitive psychology, spreading activation theory depicted memory as an

object, a trace, or an engram (Lockhart, 2002). However, Craik & Lockhart (1972) developed a classic

study that disproved these tenets of spreading activation; thus, their success evidenced a phenomenon

called ” levels of processing”. They showed that deep or semantically processed stimuli had a higher

chance of recall than shallow or physically processed stimuli. Their replication of effects of levels of

processing when participants did not expect subsequent recall or recognition tests reveals the

formidable nature of this theory.

The levels of processing view served as a backbone for the memory research community

because it provided the threadbare for future studies of explicit and implicit memory. Bringing levels of

processing to the forefront of memory research, led to the search for dissociable memory systems, or

retrieval strategies (Tulving, 1983). However, Roediger (1990) posed that the dissociation of semantic

processing effects on explicit and implicit memory tasks only pertained to perceptual priming tests.

Comparing younger and older adults, older participants tend to score lower than younger participants

on explicit memory tasks. However, they showed close to normal performance on perceptual implicit

tasks (Light & Singh, 1987).

4

Monti, Gabrieli, Reminger, Rinaldi, Wilson, & Fleischman (1996) manipulated levels of

processing to evaluate conceptual processing during priming tasks. To accomplish this goal, the

researchers used exemplar generation and cued-recall. As a result, older adults showed more deeply

processed priming than shallow processed priming (Chiarello & Hoyer, 1988; Light & Singh, 1996).

The process dissociation procedure used an opposition paradigm to show the dissociation

between subliminal and supraliminal processes. After reading a list of names, participants were told

that the presented names were nonfamous. In the testing condition, the subjects saw the same

nonfamous names, famous names, and novel nonfamous names. The probability of mislabeling a

nonfamous name as famous shows the effect of subliminal processes. Supraliminal processes would

have helped the participant identify the stimuli in the forced-choice test (Toth, Reingold, & Jacoby,

1994).

Additionally, elaboration and retrieval intentionality were thought to be paramount to levels of

processing effects on memory (Mandler, Hamson & Dorfman, 1990; Schacter, Bowers, & Booker, 1989).

Newell & Andrews (2004) used a direct test of lexical processing to investigate whole word processing in

shallow levels of processing conditions. They showed the effects of graphemic, phonemic, and semantic

tasks on stem completion task performance. The direct test instructed the participants to complete the

stems with target list words. The indirect test instructed participants to complete the stems with the

first word that came to mind.

When coupled with the encoding specificity principle, the transfer-appropriate processing

theory stands in direct opposition to levels of processing theory (Lockhart, 2002). However, Fisher &

Craik qtd in Lockhart (2002) showed the primacy of deep levels of processing used in recall performance

during the full engagement of transfer-appropriate processing approaches.

There are five main types of implicit memory tasks which lie along the perceptual/ conceptual

continuum (Mitchell & Bruss, 2003). The category exemplar test is a popular implicit memory test

5

among cognitive researchers. During the test, the participants view target exemplars from taxonomic

groups of animals and vegetables. Explicit memory and implicit memory task distinctions begin to blur

because this test is not affected by variations in surface features or modalities (Srinivas & Roediger,

1990). Semantic levels of processing surprisingly affect this task although it is still considered to be a

“priming” task (Monti et al., 1996). However, category exemplar priming does not depend on explicit

retrieval strategies. Therefore, there may be a neural mechanism that drives the conceptual facilitation

of memory (Monti et al., 1996). There remains a paucity of research that examines the direct effects of

semantically processed stimuli on category exemplar task performance in older adults.

Relationship between deep levels of processing, subliminal memory, and aging explicit memory

The present study aims to study how semantic processing affects explicit memory task

performance when moderated by subliminal retrieval. This study may shed light on the effectiveness of

cognitive and behavioral strategies used to treat Alzheimer’s disease and dementia by revealing the

strength of memory enhancing interventions using knowledge of the influence of the subliminal memory

processes on semantically processed explicit memory in older adults. In a previous study, Brandshaw

and Anderson (1982) showed the effect of elaboration and thematic-relatedness on memory processes.

Their study demonstrated higher memory performance in the formation of elaborately integrated

memory traces and lower memory performance in the formation of poorly integrated memory traces.

Hence, their study relates the activation of neural networks through the elaboration model of

interconnected memory traces. By making the distinction between related and unrelated conditions,

the researchers precipitated the use of thematic/non-thematic methodologies to analyze elaborative

levels of memory processes (Bradshaw & Anderson, 1982). In the current study, I adapted their

methodology to fit my experimental model for studying explicit memory performance.

Purpose of this study

6

In the current study, I will investigate the effects of presentation of subliminal/supraliminal

stimuli and shallow/deep levels of processing on explicit memory task performance in older adults. I

hypothesize that when controlling presentation of stimuli, there will be higher performance in deep

processing conditions than shallow processing conditions. Earlier studies showed better performance

using deep processing rather than shallow processing (Drury, Kinsella & Ong, 2000). When levels of

processing are controlled, subliminally presented conditions should yield lower explicit memory

performance scores than supraliminal presentation conditions. Fay, Isingrini, & Clarys (2005) revealed

similar effects of semantic processing and conscious awareness on perceptual and conceptual implicit

memory. The interaction of levels of processing effects with presentation of stimuli should show higher

performance in subliminal presentation and deep levels of processing conditions than in subliminal

presentation and shallow processing conditions. A recent experiment showed how participants use

semantic processing to facilitate conceptual unconscious memory test performance (Paivio, 1979;

Richardson, 1980). Generally, I expect to see higher explicit memory performance in subliminal

presentation and deep levels of processing conditions and lower performance in subliminal and shallow

levels of processing conditions in older adults revealing unconscious facilitation of deeply processed

explicit memory in older adults. Please refer to Figure 6 for the graph of the hypothesized interaction.

Method

Participants

The participant pool will consist of roughly 50 members from the Sacramento/Yolo aging

population. All individuals chosen for the sample will be over the age of 55. I will disseminate flyers

recruiting participants from the following senior communities and organizations: Ethel Hart MacLeod

Senior Center, Campus Commons Residential Community, St Francis Retirement Homes, Camellia

Commons Retirement Residential Community, Arden Park Villa, Albert Einstein Senior Center, Leisure

Manor, Mercy McMahon Terrace, Senior Spectrum, Broadway Senior Center, Zencar, Easter Seals, and

7

Senior Center Elk Grove. Refer to Figures 4 and 5 for the flyers recruiting the subject pool from senior

organizations within the Sacramento/Elk Grove region. Additionally, refer to Figure 8 to see a sample

recruitment letter I plan to submit to the administrator of each senior organization.

The flyer will instruct the participants to contact the activity coordinators of the residential

community for information about the nature of the experiment to mitigate their fears of participating in

a research study. I will telephone potential participants and screen for basic computer knowledge and

cognitive abilities with the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Abilities, which has a maximum duration of

ten minutes (Desmond, Tatemichi, & Hanzawa, 1994). During the interview, I will request from them

the following information: 1) name, (2) age, (3) email, (4) their willingness to participate in the study, (5)

phone number, and, (6) education level.

Design

I will use a 2x2 factorial design consisting of two within-subjects variables, presentation of

stimuli (subliminal/supraliminal) and elaborative levels of processing (shallow/deep). The deep levels of

processing condition will be implemented through the presentation of thematically related words. The

shallow levels of processing condition will be administered through the presentation of non-thematic

words. The dependent variable will be explicit memory test performance. Refer to Table 1 for

operational definitions of each variable. Refer to Table 1 for a description of independent and

dependent variables used in the experiment.

Materials

Cognitive Pretest. Researchers designed the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Abilities to

provide researchers with an instrument for quick and efficient screening of individuals with impaired

visual and writing abilities (Brandt, Spencer, & Folstein, 1996). The Telephone Interview for Cognitive

Abilities has a high degree of reliability and validity as a screening assessment (Brandt, Spencer, &

Folstein, 1996). In particular, its effectiveness surpasses the Mini-Mental Status Exam in detecting

8

cognitive limitations among aging individuals. The results of the test reliably show the differences

between those with cognitive impairments (scores below 25) and those with normal cognition (scores

between 25 and 30) (Desmond, Tamechi, & Hanzawa, 1994). To determine the eligibility for

participating in the experiment, participants scoring below 25 will be excluded from the study. See

Table 2 for a model Telephone Interview Cognitive Status exam used to screen the pool of subjects.

Graphic User Interface. An ASUS Windows 7 512 MB GEFORCE G210M gaming computer

monitor will provide the setting for the four phase human-computer interaction. The font types, sizes

animation, and colors throughout the graphic interface will be consistent throughout the phases to

ensure that the results are not confounded by differences in font sizes and readability. To capture and

record the screen presentation, I will use Windows Live Movie Maker. To burn the DVD, l will use

Windows DVD Maker. These two programs were downloaded as freeware for Windows 7 Home

Premium.

Thematic Word List. To create a word list for the deep levels of processing condition, I will

randomly generate the thematic words from the following website:

http://www.catalandictionary.org/wordnets/eng/ListOfWordNets.htm. In my study, I will use the

theme of “Zoo Animals” because zoo animals’ names are commonly known to most members of society.

The following website displays the list of “Zoo Animals”:

http://www.catalandictionary.org/wordnets/eng/ZooAnimalList.htm.

In the deep levels of processing condition, ten words will be randomly chosen from the “Zoo

Animal” list. Although people generally know enough about these categories to see that several words

from the list are related, to error on the side of caution, I will be checking for the reliability of the

thematic nature of the words on each list. When presented with the list of potentially thematic words, I

will aim for an inter-rater reliability coefficient of .70. Achieving this measure for each word’s thematic

9

relatedness will solidify my decision to include the word on the thematic word list. Refer to Figure 2 for

the rater questionnaire used for the assessment of rating reliability of thematically related words.

Non-Thematic/Random Word List. I will randomly generate the non-thematic word list for

phases I and 4 from the following websites: http://www.mcfedries.com/JavaScript/RandomWords.asp

and http://www.randomword.net/?. Additionally, I will randomly generate eight non-thematic words

from the aforementioned website to create distracter words for the recognition test.

Recognition Test. The recognition test will be a forty question pencil and paper forced-choice

exam. The participants will be instructed to check “Yes” or “No” to indicate whether the given word was

seen in the list of presented words. I will calculate six scores altogether, one sub-score for the number

of words recognized from each within subject condition (subliminal/supraliminal, deep/shallow levels of

processing), one general score for the number of words one correctly identified from the original list and

a sub-score for false alarms (incorrect “Yes” responses). Please refer to Figure 3 for the sample

recognition test.

Procedure

I will administer the following four phases during the computerized part of the study: non-

thematic/supraliminal, thematic/subliminal, thematic/supraliminal, and non-thematic/subliminal. The

thematic/non-thematic conditions and subliminal/supraliminal conditions will be counterbalanced for

each participant to reduce order effects. In the non-thematic/supraliminal condition, I will present a

series of 10 non-thematic words to the participants. These words will be presented for 2 seconds each.

Next, in the thematic/subliminal condition, the participants will see a series of 10 thematic words

presented for .05s each. Then, in the thematic/supraliminal condition, ten words will be presented for 2

seconds at a time. Finally, in the non-thematic/subliminal condition, ten words will be presented for .05

seconds each. Because the literature shows no absolute threshold for supraliminal perception, I made a

judgment call using research on age-related processing limitations and decided to use a five second

10

standard for the supraliminal presentation condition (Moore, 1982; Whiting & Smith, 1997). Although

the research overwhelmingly accepts 1ms for the subliminal perceptual threshold, for this experiment,

software constraints limited the duration of the subliminal presentation condition to .05s(Moore, 1982;

Khilstrom, 1987). I chose to create a word list length of twenty words for each levels of processing

condition because research suggests that aging working memory capacity can store approximately a 15

item word list without experiencing cognitive overload (Nielsen, Lolk, & Kragh-Sorensen, 1998). Please

refer to Figure 1 for a complete word list for each levels of processing condition.

Finally, the participants will take a 40 word pencil and paper recognition test comprised of forty

“Yes”/”No” questions that will test the participant’s explicit memory of the presented word stimuli.

Sixteen words will be randomly chosen from each levels of processing condition for placement on the

recognition test. The explicit memory test methodology was adapted from a priming and word

recognition study by Tulving, Schacter & Stark (1982). I will compute the number of correct ‘Yes”

responses as a general score for the explicit memory test. The participant will have 15-20 minutes to

complete the exam but there will be no time limit for answering each individual question.

The participants’ anonymity will be protected through the use of codes to identify participants.

Further, their rights to confidentiality will not be violated for the presented results will be based on

group rather than individual averages.

Statistical Analysis

Using the traditional ANOVA, I will explore the sources of variation along each dimension of

analysis. I will use the mixed 2x2 model ANOVA to examine the main effect of presentation of stimuli

IV1 and elaborative levels of processing, IV2. I will analyze the role of unconscious processes on

elaborative processing, IV1 X IV2, during the explicit memory task. I hypothesize that the participants’

score on words presented subliminally will be higher than those presented supraliminally in the deep

levels of processing condition. First, I will analyze the main effect of presentation of stimuli. I propose

11

that supraliminal presentation of stimuli will yield higher scores than subliminal presentation of stimuli. I

will also investigate the simple effect of each level of elaborative processing IV2. I will determine whether

the scores on deeply processed words will be higher than those words processed at the surface level.

Lastly, I will examine the potential interaction between the two within subject variables: presentation of

stimuli, and elaborative levels of processing to see if there are any dichotomous relationships between

these variables IV1xIV2 I pose that there will be higher explicit memory scores for subliminally presented

words in deeply processed conditions than scores for words presented subliminally in shallow processed

conditions.

12

References

Anooshian, L.J. (1997). Distinctions between implicit and explicit memory: Significance for understanding

cognitive development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 21, 453-478.

Anooshian, L. J. (1999). Understanding age differences in memory: Disentangling conscious and

unconscious processes. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 23, 1-18.

Baddeley, A. (1998). Working memory. Life Sciences, 321, 167-173.

Bradshaw, G. L. & Anderson, J. R. (1982). Elaborative encoding as an explanation of levels of processing.

Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 165-174.

Brainerd, C. J., Stein, L. M., & Reyna, V. F. (1998). On the development of conscious and

unconscious memory. Developmental Psychology, 34, 342-357.

Brandt, T., Spencer, M., & Folstein, M. (1996). Telephone interview for cognitive status.

Clinical Nurse Research.

Caldwell, JI, Masson, ME (2001). Conscious and unconscious influences of memory for object location.

Memory & Cognition, 29, 285-295.

Carroll, M. & Byrne, B. (1985). Autobiographical memory and perceptual learning: A developmental

study using picture recognition, naming latency, and perceptual identification. Memory &

Cognition, 13, 273-279.

Chiarello, C. & Hoyer, W. J. (1988). Adult age differences in implicit and explicit memory: Time course

and encoding effects. Psychology and Aging, 3, 358-366.

Craik F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (2009). Levels of processing and Zinchenko’s approach to memory

research. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 46(6), 52-60.

Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal

of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.

Desmond, D. W., Tatemichi, T. K. , & Hanzawa, L. (1994). The telephone interview for

13

cognitive status (TICS): Reliability and validity in a stroke sample. International Journal of

Geriatric Psychiatry, 9, 803-807.

Drury, J. L., Kinsella, G. J., & Ong, B. (2000). Age differences in explicit and implicit memory

for pictures. Neuropsychology, 14, 93-101.

Ellis, H. D., Ellis, D. M., & Hosie, J. A. (1993). Priming effects in children’s face recognition. British Journal

of Psychology, 84, 101-110.

Fay, S. , Insingrini, M., & Clarys, D. (2005). Effects of depth of processing and ageing on word-

stem and word-fragment implicit memory tasks: Test of the lexical-processing

hypothesis. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 785-802.

Greenbaum, J. L. & Graf, P. (1989). Preschool period development of implicit and explicit remembering.

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 417-420.

Joyce, C. A., Paller, K. A., McIsaac, H. K., & Kutas, M. (1998). Memory changes with normal aging:

Behavioral and electrophysiological measures. Psychopharmacology,35, 669-678.

Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). The cognitive unconscious. Science, 237, 1445-1451.

Light, L. L. & Singh, A. (1987). Implicit and explicit memory in young and older adults. Journal of

Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 531-541.

Lockhart, R. S. (2002). Levels of processing, transfer-appropriate processing, and the concept of

robust encoding. Memory, 10, 397-403.

Lorsbach, T. C. & Morris, A. K. (1991). Direct and indirect testing of picture memory in second and sixth

grade children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 18-27.

Lorsbach, T. C., & Worman, L. J. ( 1990). Episodic priming in children with learning disabilities.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 15, 93-102.

Mandler, G. (1980).Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87, 252-

271.

14

Mandler, G., Hamson, C. O., & Dorfman, J. (1990). Tests of dual process theory: Word priming and

recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 42A, 713-739.

Mitchell, D. B. & Bruss, P. J. (2003). Age differences in implicit memory: Conceptual, perceptual, or

methodological? Psychology and Aging, 18, 807-822.

Monti, L. A., Reminger, S. L., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Rinaldi, J. A. & Wilson, R. S. (1996).

Differential effects of aging and Alzheimer’s disease on conceptual implicit and explicit

memory. Neuropsychology, 10, 101-112.

Moore, T. E. (1982). Subliminal advertising: What you see is what you get. Journal of Marketing, 48, 38-

47.

Naito, M. (1990). Repetition priming in children and adults: Age-related dissociation between implicit

and explicit memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 462-484.

Newell, B.R. & Andrews, S. (2004) Levels of processing effects on implicit and explicit memory tasks:

Using question position to investigate the lexical-processing hypothesis. Experimental

Psychology, 51, 1-13.

Nielsen, H., Lolk, A., & Kragh-Sorensen, P. (1998). Age-associated memory impairment-pathological

memory or normal aging. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 39, 33-37.

Paivio, A. (1979) Imagery and verbal process. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Paller, K. A. (2000). Neural measures of conscious and unconscious memory. Behavioural

Neurology, 12, 127-141.

Parkin, A. J. & Streete, S. (1988). Implicit memory in young children and adults. British Journal of

Psychology, 79, 361-369.

Postma, A., Antonides, R., Wester, A. J., & Kessels, R. P. C. (2008). Spared unconscious influences of

spatial memory in diencephalic amnesia. Experimental Brain Research, 190, 125-133.

Richardson, J.T.E.(1980). Mental imagery and human memory. London: Macmillan.

15

Roediger, H. L. III. (1990). Implicit memory: Retention without remembering. American Psychologist, 45,

1043-1056.

Schacter, D. L., Bowers, J. & Booker, J. (1989). Intention, awareness and implicit memory: The retrieval

intentionality criterion. In S. Lewandowsky, J.C. Dunn, & K. Kirsner (Eds.), Implicit memory:

Theoretical issues (pp. 47-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Snirvas, K. & Roediger, H. L., III (1990). Classifying implicit memory tests: Category association and

anagram solution. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 389-412.

Toth, J. P., Reingold, E. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Toward a redefinition of implicit memory:

Process-dissociation following elaborative processing and self-generation. Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 20, 290-303.

Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory. New York: Oxford University.

Tulving, E., Schacter, D. L., & Stark, H. A. (1982). Priming effects in word-fragment

completions are independent of recognition memory. Journal of Experimental

Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 336-342.

Whiting, W. L. IV., & Smith, A. D. (1997). Differential age-related processing limitations in recall and

recognition tasks. Psychology and Aging, 12(2), 216-224.

16

Table 1. Variable definition table

Operational Definitions of Independent and Dependent Variables used in the Memory and Aging Study

Variable List Description

Presentation of Stimuli IV2

Subliminal IV1A In two out of four phases, 10 will be presented to the

participants for .05 seconds each.

Supraliminal IV1B In two out of four phases, 10 words will be presented to

the participants for 2 seconds each.

Elaborative Levels of Processing IV3

Deep IV2a In two out of four phases, 10 thematically related words

will be presented to the participants. The order of

conditions will be counterbalanced to minimize order

effects.

Shallow IV2b In two out of four phases, 10 non-thematically related

words will be presented to the participants. The order

of conditions will be counterbalanced to minimize order

effects.

17

Explicit Memory Test Performance DV The participant’s score on a forty item multiple-choice

recognition test administered after the presentation of

twenty-four words. The score represents the number of

total correct “Yes” responses to the question of

whether the participant recognizes the word from the

original word list and the sub-totals for the number of

subliminally presented words guessed correctly,

supraliminal words guessed correctly, the number of

deeply processed and shallow processed words guessed

correctly and false alarms, the number of incorrect

“Yes” responses, to study forgetting in aging memory.

Although wrong answers will be recorded, participants

will not be penalized for them. Sixteen words from

each presentation condition (subliminal/supraliminal)

will be the material for the recognition test. Within

each group of words, eight of those words will be

randomly selected from the deeply processed condition

and eight words will be randomly selected from the

shallow processed condition. The remaining eight

words will be chosen from a random word list.

18

Table 2. Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status

19

Figure 1. Non-Thematic/Supraliminal, Non-Thematic/Subliminal, and Thematic/Subliminal,

Thematic/Supraliminal Word Lists

The order of experimental phases resembles the order on the submitted demo DVD.

Phase I

Non-thematic/Supraliminally Presented

bankruptcy

motorcycle

torchlight

buddy

unfasten

thumbprint

technician

rottweiler

middlebrow

grandchild

Phase II

Thematic (“Zoo Animals”)/Subliminally Presented

zebra

penguin

rhino

20

hyena

giraffe

lion

hippo

orangutan

tiger

leopard

Phase III

Thematic/Supraliminally Presented

elephant

bear

chimp

alligator

gorilla

crocodile

kangaroo

gazelle

lizard

antelope

Phase IV

Non-thematic/Subliminally Presented

baron

groin

exhilarate

bandanna

21

incongruity

skirt

drive

test

notion

compactor

Four Distracter Non-thematic words for Recognition Test

nostril

vigorous

breastbone

purse

Four Distracter Thematic words for the Recognition Test

camel

llama

chinchilla

panther

Six Distracter Thematic words for the Inter-rater Questionnaire

camel

chinchilla

llama

panda

snake

panther

22

Figure 2. Questionnaire used to assess the thematic relatedness of words in the thematic word list.

Instructions: Please study these words carefully and rate how strongly you agree that each word

on the list is related to the word list theme, “Zoo Animals” Fill in the bubble that represents your level of

agreement of the relatedness of the word to the word list theme.

1= strongly disagree

2=somewhat disagree

3=neither disagree nor agree

4=somewhat agree

5=strongly agree

zebra 1 2 3 4 5

penguin

rhino

hyena

23

giraffe

lion

hippo

kangaroo

tiger

leopard

elephant

bear

24

chimp

alligator

gorilla

crocodile

lizard

gazelle

orangutan

antelope

25

camel

chinchilla

llama

panda

snake

panther

26

Figure 3. Forty-Item forced-choice recognition test

Instructions: Please study these words carefully and checkmark either the “Yes” or “No” box indicating whether you remember seeing the following words during the multi-phase computer screen presentation.

Yes No

bandanna

alligator

breastbone

chinchilla

antelope

chimp

lion

unfasten

gorilla

panther

torchlight

27

elephant

nostril

rhino

buddy

kangaroo

groin

vigorous

middlebrow

llama

penguin

lizard

grandchild

28

orangutan

test

camel

notion

gazelle

skirt

exhilarate

thumbprint

giraffe

rottweiler

compactor

hyena

29

hippo

drive

zebra

bankruptcy

30

Figure 4. Recruitment Flyer used in Senior Residential Communities

Volunteers Needed for Cognitive Aging Study

Cognitive Aging Study(916)616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916)616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Conitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916) 616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916)616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916)616-9672

Cognitive Aging Study(916)616-96672

Figure 2. Recruitment Flyer distributed through Spectrum Magazines, Senior Magainzes, AARP, Ethel Hart Senior Center, Sacramento Book Collector’s Club, Campus Commons, and Sacramento [

This study will explore how older adults perceive and remember a series of words presented on a computer screen. From this study, I hope to pave the way for future studies on dementia and human consciousness by finding trends in different types of words a healthy aging adult is able to remember from previously seen lists of words.

Eligibility for Participation: I will be recruiting 50 high functioning adults ages 55+. Each participant will be screened with a telephone cognitive assessment.

Level of Involvement: I will provide my own transportation to travel to a place of your convenience

when we set up an appointment that works best for the both of us. The cognitive test lasts for approximately ten minutes. The total time you would have to spend in front of a computer screen is 3

minutes. On the computer, the only button you would have to press is “play.” The total time of the experiment is a maximum of 25 minutes. I will compensate each participant for their time with a $5.00 gift card to a

If interested in participating, please contact Felicia Oropeza, M.A. g Psychology candidate. C:(916)616-9672

Or email feoropeza@gmail.com

31

Figure 5. Recruitment Flyer to distribute among friends and family members for pilot study testing and to establish inter-rater reliability for word lists.

Volunteers needed for Pilot Study Testing

Who can participate?:

I will be recruiting twenty individuals between the ages of 15 and 54 to test my cognitive aging experiment.

What is involved?:

Ten testers will be asked to rate the degree of relatedness of twenty words to a specified theme using a scale from 1 to 5.

Ten testers will go through the entire experiment to ensure that the experimental conditions measure the variables they are supposed to measure.

o These testers will determine whether the written test produces the hypothesized results.

The experiment will involve a 3 minute presentation of 40 words and a 15-20 minute written test after the computerized trials.

I will compensate the participants for their time with a $5.00 giftcard from Starbucks.

If interested in pilot testing, please contact Felicia Oropeza at 916-616-9672

Or email her at feoropeza@gmail.com

32

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Pilo

t T

estin

g

Figure 6. Graph of Hypothesized Interaction of Thematic Relation with Presentation Condition

Blue Subliminal Presentation

Red Supraliminal Presentation

Performance

High

Low

Thematic Non-thematic

Thematic Relatedness Condition

33

Figure 7. Drafted Preliminary Letters for Recruitment

Email to Nancy Anzelmo M Sc.G.- December 19th 2009

Hello,I was a recent student in your care management gero 103 class at CSUS. I am doing a research study (my graduate thesis) on aging memory in the psychology department.  I would like to set up an appointment with you to discuss different options as to where I can recruit participants for my experiment, how I would best approach different agencies to put up flyers, and whether you may know of any contacts in the local area that I can be referred to for assistance with recruiting a subject pool.  I need to recruit 84 older adults ages 65+.  I have approximately 20 from family and friends.  Would you be able to meet with me after the holidays and if so, when would be a good time to meet? I will be unavailable from December 30th to January 7th but I can meet anytime after that.

Email to Linda- December 25th 2009Hello,I am a computer tutor at Ethel Hart Senior Center working with Anne bimonthly. I am doing a research study (my graduate thesis) on aging memory in the psychology department.  I would like to set up an appointment with you to discuss different options as to where I can recruit participants for my experiment, how I would best approach different agencies to put up flyers, and whether you may know of any contacts in the local area that I can be referred to for assistance with recruiting a subject pool. I need to recruit 84 older adults ages 65+.  I have approximately 20 from family and friends.  Would you be able to meet with me after the holidays and if so, when would be a good time to meet? I will be out of town from December 30th to January 7th but I can meet anytime after that.

Email to Bob Pierre-December 25th 2009Hello,I am a close friend of Louisa Vessell. I attend Medical History Museum seminars pretty regularly. I am doing a Masters thesis on aging memory in the psychology department at CSUS. I would like to set up an appointment with you to discuss recruitment of subjects and see whether you may know of any people who may be interested in participating in such a study. I will be attending the next Medical History Museum meeting in January but I would like to meet with you earlier in January if possible. I am going to be out of town until the 7th of January so please email me times you are available.

Email to Darryl Morrison – December 25th 2009Hello, I am conducting a graduate thesis study on aging memory for graduation fall 2010. I would like to discuss with you recruitment options such as the best approach for distributing flyers within the club or within the California book club network and whether you know of any contacts in the local area that I can be referred to for assistance with recruiting a large aging subject pool. I need to recruit 84 older adults ages 65+. I have approximately 20 subjects so far from family and friends. Would you be able to meet with me early

34

during the January meeting to discuss recruitment possibilities? I would be able to meet at 6pm. Thank you very much.

Figure 8. Brief Description of Project to Senior Service Organizations

I am a graduate student in Psychology at California State University, Sacramento. For my Master’s thesis, I am conducting research on memory in older adults. During the summer of 2010, I want to recruit fifty participants who are age 55 or older without any unusual memory impairment to participate in my research.

The participants will first be given a ten minute telephone interview assessing their

cognitive status. The interview questions are not personal and present few risks. The participants will later be asked to sit in front of a monitor and will be presented with a series of forty words flashed for either .2 seconds or 2 seconds on the computer screen. The time lapse between each word will be 1 second. At the end of the experiment, participants will be given a 40 question memory test where they will check “Yes” or “No” to indicate whether they remember a word as being from the series of flashed words. I would be glad to demonstrate the computer task to you if you wish to see it.

This individual testing should take about 15 minutes to complete. To protect the privacy of participants, I will use codes rather than names to identify each participant, and only group results will be reported. The research might lead to a better understanding of memory in older adults. Research sessions will be scheduled at a place and time that is convenient for participants. I will compensate each participant for their time with a $5.00 gift card to Walmart.

I would like to hand out or post flyers to recruit participants from your organization, consistent with any policies you have. This would begin after I receive approval from the human subjects committee in the Psychology department. An approximate starting date is mid-June of 2010. Please call me if you have any questions or need more information. If I have your permission to recruit participants from your organization, please print this letter on your company’s letterhead, add the name of your organization and your signature in the space below, and return the letter to me, preferably by May 10th 2010.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Felicia Oropeza(916)616-9672feoropeza@gmail.com

35

I give my permission for Felicia Oropeza to recruit participants for her research from (insert name of organization) ______________________________.

Signed: ______________________________

Date: ________________

Comment Page

To make my experiment more manageable, I have limited the number of independent variables

in my experiment. Notably, I will not include the independent variable, visualization ability, in my

research study because it shows to be a potentially confusing variable for the analysis of memory

processes. Additionally, I will expand the age group from individuals 65 years and older to individuals 55

years and older. Also, I changed the methodology used to analyze deep vs. shallow levels of processing

where instead of using antonyms/synonyms, vs. rhyming/non-rhyming words, I am using thematic and

non-thematically related words. By doing this, I removed many confounding variables of prior exposure

to the presented word lists which could have had undesirable influences on the explicit memory test

results. I changed the recognition test to a paper and pencil test to accommodate the needs of the

aging population. I also shortened the word lists used during the testing conditions to not overload the

older participants’ memory capacity. Finally, I have reduced the number of participants from 84 to 50

because there are less variables and no between-subject variables.

Further, I will ask the participants to rate the thematically relatedness of the words presented in

the deep levels of processing condition on a 1 to 5 scale. I will also ask the participants to rate the non-

relatedness of the words presented in the shallow levels of processing condition on a 1 to 5 scale. The

score of 1 will indicate an unsuccessful pairing and 5 will indicate a successful pairing. I will give them

more words than I intend to use assuming that they will give some words low scores. Additionally,

36

once the programming for the computerized trials is completed, I will pretest my entire project using 10-

20 individuals outside of the target age group. Their performance will help me assess whether the

programmed experimental trials are successful, and whether the timing for subliminal/supraliminal

presentation does indeed produce a reliable difference in test scores.

The literature on subliminal advertising and aging memory showed no clearly defined

subliminal/supraliminal threshold for word stimuli presentation. However, research agrees upon a

common measuring rubric of 1 millisecond for subliminal perception. Due to software constraints, I was

unable to replicate 1 millisecond with my tachistoscope. I made a judgment call after examining how

the computer handles subliminally presented stimuli and finally decided .5 seconds for subliminal

presentation and 5 seconds for supraliminal presentation. Additionally, literature on working memory

capacity and aging reveals that older adults can process 15 visually presented words without pause in

one sitting. Aware of the aging working memory storage capacity limitations and the need to make my

experiment somewhat challenging for the participants, I decided to create twenty item word lists for

both thematic and non thematic relatedness conditions. I also decided to create a 1 second time lapse

between each word presentation.

I added the inter-rater questionnaire for the thematic relatedness word conditions to the

proposal. I also included the 40 word recognition test in the proposal and a graph of the proposed

interaction. I added the word lists for the non-thematic and thematic relatedness conditions. I amended

the flyers for both the pilot study and the recruitment of participants. Finally, I included the description

letter that I will be faxing/emailing and sending via mail to the various organizations that have given

their tentative approval.

I had a little trouble making the DVD. I managed to download two viruses while searching for

freeware tachitoscopes and screen captures. However, I successfully prevailed by finding the Windows

37

Live Movie Maker add-on for Windows 7 Home Premium. That program allowed me to create a

tachitoscope and create a video which I burned to the DVD using Windows DVD Maker.