The Pollyanna tenet is defined by Matlin (2006) with respect to memory and other(a) cognitive processes as kind items argon usually neat to a greater extent(prenominal) efficiently and oftentimes accurately than slight winsome items. This was consequently named the Pollyanna teaching after the fictional character Pollyanna who was love to look on the bright side of life and to see to it soberness out of every environment and situation (Warr, 1971, as cited in Sargent, 2005). Numerous studies have too supported this attender by illustrating that people t hold back to presentation optimistic beliefs of themselves (Larwood & Whittaker, 1977; Svenson, 1981, as cited in Silvera, Krull & Sassler, 2002) and the external world somewhat them (Klar & Gilda, 1997, as cited in Silvera et al., 2002). One of the basis arising from the Pollyanna principle be intimate that people ar much accurate in schooling and the subsequent come back of nomenclature that atomic num ber 18 plunge as pleasurable in comparison to lecture that are found as slight(prenominal) agreeable and neutral (Sargent, 2005). Matlin and Stang (1978, as cited in Matlin, 2006) analyzed prior research of such nature and found support for this basis. This has typically been time- tried and true through the everyday interpret where subjects are psychometric well-tried by eruditeness engaging, neutral and grim spoken communication and after a specified time delay they are time- running played on what lyric they can anamnesis. In 1979, Matlin and Gawron tested 133 students on 14 measures of Pollyannaism to examine whether they correlated with each other. Two of these measures were self-rating and selective ring. Their results showed that students who rated themselves as optimistic and happy showed2Pollyannaism on other measures including recalling pleasing nomenclature to a greater extent often than grim row from a propensity. A make by Lewis, Critchley , Smith and Dolan (2005) tested a related fa! ctor to the Pollyanna formula; liquid remains substance congruency. Lewis et al. tested subjects by presenting them with convinced(p)ly charged and negatively charged language and and then manipulated their affective states on recall. Functional imagery was used to monitor the subject?s brain activity. Their results showed that biliousness congruent facilitation occurs at recall quite an than that of recollection. Lewis et al results in both case supports the increasing evidence which already suggests that somevirtuoso?s affective state relates to their cognitive processes and that the person?s affective state can act as a retrieval cue, for example allowing arbitrary material and intelligences to be much than promptly recalled (Isen & Shalker, 1982, as cited in Sargent, 2005). In 2008 Monnier and Syssau conducted a study on word lovableness on the oral working memory. They performed the typical Pollyanna test on xxx cardinal psychology students and atomic n umber 53 component of their test was to ask the students, one at a time, to recall manner of speaking they had antecedently been read. An mistake analysis on the results obtained on what linguistic communication were recalled was carried out. once summed Monnier and Syssau found item errors were much to a greater extent(prenominal) frequent for the neutral and hot magnetic drop of manner of speaking than with the much than lovely. This present try (with the riddance of using neutral speech in the haggle used) was designed as a replicate of the Pollyanna Principle general study where subjects are tested by learning loving, neutral and vitriolic manner of speaking. after(prenominal) a specified time delay they are tested on what wrangle3they can recall (Matlin & Stang, 1978, as cited in Matlin 2006). It was hypothesized that a high part of thespian?s result recall more winning words than little harming words if the participants rate themselves as being in a positive mood. It was as well hypothesized that if! all words were recalled that were non on the word heeds they would be the less nice words. MethodParticipantsTen participants were chosen from the experimentationer?s family and friends. The participants include five females (mean age, 36.2 years), and five males (mean age, 38.8). They were all native speakers of English. MaterialsA list of xl words was prepared as chosen by the experimenter. twenty sawbuck bill of these words draw sweet moods or situations and cardinal described unpalatable moods or situations (see Appendix). All forty words were apiece written on a card. A panachel of the words was written out for the experimenter to mark on. ProcedureThe forty card were shuffled so they were in a random order. Each participant was tested individually and earlier the test began they were asked to state if they were in a relatively positive or4negative mood. Each participant was then shown a card, one at a time, and asked to try to esteem them. Once the last wo rd was shown the experimenter engaged in a dickens minute chat with the participant about, for example, the weather. At the end of the two minute delay the participant was asked to recall, in any order, as many words as they could. The experimenter marked slay on a list of the words what words were recalled and state if and what special words were recalled. Once the participant could non recall any more words they were debriefed about the experiment, any questions were answered and they were thanked for their company and time. ResultsThe results of the words recalled were graphed (see Graph 1) and the variables were analyzed. All ten participants stated they were in a positive mood when asked ahead their test started. Overall, fifty dollar bill percent of participants recalled more pleasant words than less pleasant, thirty percent of participants recalled more less pleasant words than pleasant words, and twenty percent of participants recalled the comparable(p) amount of pleasant and less pleasant words. An error analysis w! as too conducted on the words recalled. An error was defined as recalling a word which did not appear on the cards. Word errors occurred more frequently with the unpleasant words with a mean figure of 22 compared to pleasant word errors with a mean figure of 14. 5Graph 1Number of Words Recalled by Participants. DiscussionThe results of the new study partially supported the hypotheses; that a high percent of participant?s will recall more pleasant words than less pleasant word if had previously rated themselves in a pleasant mood. The results showed that half of the participants did recall more pleasant words than unpleasant compared to only thirty percent of participants recalling more unpleasant words than the pleasant. Twenty percent recalled the same amount of words for both6categories. The hypotheses that if any words were recalled that were not on the word lists would be the less pleasant words was in any case partially supported. Both two categories of words were recalle d however, the results showed that unpleasant words were recalled more than the pleasant words. The findings support the previous research effectuate by Matlin and Gawron (1979). The results confirmed that the up-to-date experiment did show that subjects who rated themselves in a positive mood showed Pollyannaism by recalling pleasant words more often than unpleasant from a list of words. D?Argembeu, Comblam and Van Der Linden (2003, as cited in Matlin, 2006) suggested one expounding for the Pollyanna Principle, and can extend to these current results, is that visual imagery is more vivid for pleasant events than the unpleasant events making them more quick recalled. However, the subjects who recalled more unpleasant words and the subjects who recalled the same amount of pleasant and unpleasant words had as well rated themselves in a tractable mood. An explanation for these findings could be that the subjects selected in the current experiment were a midget sample and no t representative of the general population. These res! ults in like manner extend and partly support the research by Lewis et al. (2005). mode congruency was found in the subjects who recalled more words which were pleasant than unpleasant.
Again, the subjects who recalled more unpleasant words and the subjects who recalled the same amount of words in both categories fail to show support for this hypothesis. The explanation for these findings could as well be that the subjects selected in the current experiment were a venial sample and not representative of the general population. 7The results of the current experiment showed that, of the words recalled not on the li sts, the unpleasant ones were apprehension of more readily and this then shows support for the findings of Monnier and Syssau?s (2008) research. Monnier and Syssau interpreted these findings as supporting the Pollyanna Principle and explained these results as being independent of dry run processing efficiency. This explanation could also be the reason for this current experiments finding. One systematic bias observable in the results is that the pleasant and unpleasant words used are not inevitably considered to all the subjects as being pleasant or unpleasant and could have implicated which words were recalled for which subjectIn future studies on the Pollyanna Principle and to test if more pleasant or unpleasant words are recalled from a list, they could include testing more participants and also separating participants into gender and age groups. A basic reading test should also be considered completing for each participant before the start of the experiment. In conclusion, t his study examined the Pollyanna Principle and if par! ticipants recalled more pleasant or unpleasant words out of a means of forty words written on cards. The results indicated that subjects who rated themselves in positive mood showed Pollyannaism by recalling pleasant wordsmore often than the unpleasant from the list of words. However, the subjects who recalled more unpleasant words and the subjects who recalled the same amount of pleasant and unpleasant words had also rated themselves in a correct mood. The results also indicated that, of the words recalled not on the lists, the unpleasant ones were apprehension of more readily. 8ReferencesLewis, P. A., Critchley, H. D., Smith, A.P., & Dolan, R. J. (2005). Brain mechanisms for mood congruentmemory facilitation. NeuroImage, 25, 1214-1223. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from EBSCOhost database. Matlin, M. W. (2005). Cognition (5th ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey, perpetual army: Wiley. Matlin, M. W., & Gawron, V. J. (1979). Individual differences in pollyannaism. Journal ofPersonality Asse ssment, 43, 411-412. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from EBSCOhost database. Monnier, C., & Syssau, A. (2008). Semantic region to communicative short-term memory: Are pleasantwords easier to remember in incidental recall and recognition? Memory & Cognition, 36, 35-42. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from EBSCOhost database. Sargent, E. M. (2005). Does the pollyanna principle rule mood congruence? Retrieved April5, 2008, from http://www.anselm.edu/internet/psych/theses/2005/sargent/pollyanna.htmlSilvera, D. H., Krull, D. S., & Sassler, M. A. (2002). Typhoid pollyanna: The effect of class valenceon retrieval order of positive and negative category members. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 227-236. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from EBSCOhost database. 9AppendixUnpleasant and Pleasant Words UsedUnpleasant wordsPleasant words1-Awful Popular2-Sick Holiday3-Bad Stunning4-UglyGood5-QuitCheerful6-MeanNice7-LonerSuccessful8-HateFun9-TerribleHappy10-EnemyRich11-PoorHope12-TerrorKiss13-Lon elyFriendly14-DisgustingJoyful15-FailureBeautiful16-D! eadSmile17-HorriblePleasant18-AngrySunshine19-UnpleasantLove20-LostSafeThe Effects of the Pollyanna Principle When Remembering and Recalling Pleasant and Unpleasant WordsLisa SmithStudent number: 2534873Course number: 73212 If you tender to get a full essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
write my paper
