Journals / Talent / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

A Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Properties of Memory Tasks and Their Relationships with Higher-Order Thinking Skills: Recognition Versus Recall

Journal
Talent
Pages
162–175
Publication Date
2021-01-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal a statistically significant difference between the average scores of recall and recognition tasks.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to compare the psychometric properties of recognition and recall task measurements and to examine their relationships with other higher-order thinking skills.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants of the study consisted of 228 students attending first and second grade in a primary school in the city center of Eskişehir.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal a statistically significant difference between the average scores of recall and recognition tasks.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:working memory assessment · memory tasks · recall

Abstract

This study aims to compare the psychometric properties of recognition and recall task measurements and to examine their relationships with other higher-order thinking skills. Memory measurements made with recognition and recall tasks were based on the Visual Span Memory (VSM) subtest of the ASIS intelligence scale. The participants of the study consisted of 228 students attending first and second grade in a primary school in the city center of Eskişehir. The data were collected by administering the recognition and recall task forms to the students individually. The findings reveal a statistically significant difference between the average scores of recall and recognition tasks. The mean scores of the recognition task measurements are significantly higher than the mean scores of the recall task measurements (t(227) = 5.79, p <0.01; Cohen d = 0.435, Cohen dz = 0.38). In addition, there is a significant difference between the reliability coefficients of recognition and recall task score in favor of the recall task score (χ2(1) = 6.181, p <.02). It was also found that the mean item-total correlations of the recall task measurements (r=.41) were higher than the recognition task measurements (r=.27), and the item-total correlations of the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 11th, and 14th items differed significantly in favor of the recall task measurements. The correlation of the recall task score with the other 5 subtests in the ASIS intelligence scale was higher than that of the recognition task score. The findings show that the psychometric properties of the measurement performed with the recall task are stronger.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAYACAN, G., ATEŞGÖZ, N. N., SAK, U. (2021). A Comparative Analysis of Psychometric Properties of Memory Tasks and Their Relationships with Higher-Order Thinking Skills: Recognition Versus Recall. Talent, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 162–175. https://ajindex.com/articles/844095

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Abdelmoula, M., Chakroun, W., & Akrout, F. (2015). The effect of sample size and the number of items on reliability coefficients: Alpha and Rhô: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Numerical Methods and Applications, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.17654/ijnmamar2015_001_020
  2. Alloway, T. P., & Alloway, R. G. (2010). Investigating the predictive roles of working memory and IQ in academic attainment. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 106(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.11.003
  3. Andrew, D. M., & Bird, C. (1938). A comparison of two new-type questions: recall and recognition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 29(3), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0062394
  4. Bower, G. H. (2000). A brief history of memory research. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 3–32).
  5. Oxford University Press.
  6. Cleary, A. M. (2019). Dependent measures in memory research: From free recall to recognition. In H. Otani & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human memory (1st ed., pp. 19–35).
  7. Routledge. Chubala, C. M., Guitard, D., Neath, I., Saint-Aubin, J., & Surprenant, A. M. (2020). Visual similarity effects in immediate serial recall and (sometimes) in immediate serial recognition. Memory & Cognition, 48(3), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00979-5
  8. Chubala, C. M., Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2019). A comparison of immediate serial recall and immediate serial recognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 73(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000158
  9. Chubala, C., Surprenant, A. M., Neath, I., & Quinlan, P. T. (2018). Does dynamic visual noise eliminate the concreteness effect in working memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.009
  10. Cowan, N. (1999). An embedded-processes model of working memory. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 62–101). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174909.006
  11. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x01003922
  12. Dehn, M. J. (2008). Working memory and academic learning: Assessment and intervention (1st ed.). Wiley. Dehn, M. J. (2015). Essentials of working memory assessment and intervention (1st ed.). Wiley. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development