PS200 Unit 4 Encoding and Long-Term Memory Paper Example

Reviewed by Romilly Dunmore, MEd Introduction to Cognitive Psychology Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

Two trainees learning the same cardiac arrest protocol card remember it differently in this PS200 Unit 4 encoding and long-term memory paper. The trainee who wrote beside each question what it detects recalled the sequence almost perfectly a week later, while the one who reread the card missed two questions and reversed two more, as Craik and Lockhart's levels of processing predict. Godden and Baddeley's divers explain why both forgot more on their first night shifts, along with interference and fatigue. Training changes close the paper. Purdue Global PS 200, Introduction to Cognitive Psychology, assigns this paper in the BS in Psychology course.

CoursePS200 Introduction to Cognitive Psychology
UnitUnit 4
Paper typeEncoding and long-term memory paper
LengthAbout 540 words, 4 pages double-spaced
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolPurdue University Global
ProgramBS in Psychology
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for PS200 Unit 4

1

Why Protocol Questions Stick for Some Trainees: A PS200 Unit 4 Encoding and Long-Term Memory Paper

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

PS200: Introduction to Cognitive Psychology

Unit 4 Encoding and Long-Term Memory Paper

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The training program and the trainees are composite; the studies cited are real.

What this part is doingFraming the paper as an explanation of two trainees' different results shows the theory is applied to a real outcome.
2

The Situation

New call-takers at the composite center must learn a structured medical protocol: for a reported collapse, a fixed sequence of questions about breathing, consciousness and age, followed by instructions such as how to begin chest compressions. Two trainees in the same class studied the cardiac arrest card for the same amount of time. One reread it repeatedly. The other wrote, beside each question, what the answer would tell the dispatcher and what would happen next. A week later, the second trainee recalled the sequence almost perfectly; the first missed two questions and reversed two more.

Encoding: Shallow and Deep

Craik and Lockhart (1972) proposed that memory depends on how deeply information is processed when it is encountered. At the shallow end, a learner notices only how a word looks or sounds; deep processing asks what something means and ties it to what the learner already knows. Craik and Tulving (1975) tested the idea by asking people questions about words that required shallow judgments, such as whether a word was printed in capitals, or deep ones, such as whether it fit a sentence. On a later test nobody expected, the meaning questions left people with far more of the words.

The second trainee processed each protocol question for its meaning: what it detects and why it matters. The first processed the card mainly as a sequence of words. The levels-of-processing framework predicts exactly the difference they showed.

Asking what each question detects turned a list into a set of reasons, and reasons are easier to remember than lists.

Storage and Retrieval

Long-term memory is commonly split into a record of one's own experiences, episodic memory, and a store of facts and concepts, semantic memory. A protocol learned well becomes semantic knowledge, while the memory of a particular training session is episodic. Retrieval depends on cues. Godden and Baddeley (1975) found that divers who learned words underwater recalled them better underwater, and those who learned on land recalled better on land; the context of learning served as a retrieval cue.

What this part is doingConnecting context-dependent memory to the move from classroom to console shows why recall dropped on shift.
3

Why Both Forgot on the Night Shift

Both trainees recalled the protocol less well on their first live night shifts than in the classroom. Three explanations fit. The context changed, removing classroom cues. Interference rose, since the trainees were learning several other protocols at the same time and similar question sequences can compete in memory. And the stress and fatigue of night work reduced the attention available for retrieval.

What the Research Suggests for Training

Training should ask trainees to explain the purpose of each question, not just repeat it, so encoding is deep. Practice should happen at a console with recorded call audio, so the learning context matches the working one. And similar protocols should be practiced together with deliberate contrasts, so trainees learn what distinguishes them rather than confusing them. Goldstein (2019) notes that the conditions of learning and of remembering should match as closely as practical.

What this part is doingTurning each finding into a training change shows the paper uses memory research for a purpose.
4

References

Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X

Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 268-294. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268

Godden, D. R., & Baddeley, A. D. (1975). Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater. British Journal of Psychology, 66(3), 325-331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01468.x

Goldstein, E. B. (2019). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience (5th ed.). Cengage Learning.

What the PS200 Unit 4 assignment asks for

PS200's fourth unit often asks how information is encoded and stored in long-term memory and why some of it is lost. Build the paper around a real or realistic learning situation, ideally one where two people or two methods produced different results. Explain encoding with a framework such as levels of processing and describe at least one study that tested it accurately. Distinguish types of long-term memory and explain how retrieval depends on cues. Account for forgetting with more than one mechanism, such as context change, interference and reduced attention. Close with practical recommendations that follow from the research. Tie every concept back to the trainees or learners in your opening scenario.

Inside the PS200 Unit 4 example

The paper opens with the composite center's protocol, the two trainees' study methods and their recall a week later. An encoding section explains Craik and Lockhart's shallow and deep processing and Craik and Tulving's capitals and sentence-fit questions, then applies them, under a highlighted line that reasons are easier to keep than lists. A storage and retrieval section separates episodic and semantic memory and describes Godden and Baddeley's land and underwater word lists. A section on the night shift explains forgetting through lost classroom cues, interference among similar protocols and fatigue. Training recommendations close it: explain each question's purpose, practice at a console with recorded audio and contrast similar protocols, citing Goldstein.

Reading the PS200 Unit 4 grading rubric

Credit depends on accurate theory used to explain a real result. Instructors look for levels of processing, or another encoding account, described correctly with a study that tested it, and then applied to the situation. Distinguishing episodic from semantic memory earns credit when the distinction matters to the example. Explanations of forgetting should name more than one mechanism, since decay alone rarely accounts for what people lose. Recommendations that follow directly from cited findings are valued over general study tips. The paper should hold together, with the same learners or situation running throughout. Original experiments described faithfully carry more weight than textbook paraphrase, and a protocol, recipe or procedure from the student's own work makes a strong example.

Common PS200 Unit 4 mistakes, and how to avoid them

The most common slip is a paper that summarizes the memory chapter in order, with a short example added at the end. Another frequent issue describes Craik and Lockhart's framework as a fixed set of three stores, or confuses it with the stage model of memory. Students often blame all forgetting on time passing. Godden and Baddeley's study is sometimes reported as showing that location always matters, when the effect depends on the task. Recommendations tend to repeat advice like study more. Before submitting, check that your example shows a difference your theory explains, that each study is described with what participants did, and that every recommendation names the finding behind it.

Get a PS200 Unit 4 example written to your instructions

Share the scenario and the instructions with the rubric. A custom paper explains encoding, storage and retrieval with research and examples. It arrives within 24-48h; first requests are free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

Request this unit free All PS200 units Finished samples

More PS200 papers and BS in Psychology samples

PS200 Unit 4 questions, answered

What is levels of processing?

Craik and Lockhart's idea that deeper, meaning-based processing leads to better memory than shallow processing.

What are episodic and semantic memory?

Memory for personal events and memory for general knowledge.

Why do we forget?

Decay, interference and retrieval failure all play roles.

Where can I find a free PS200 Unit 4 sample paper?

This page holds the complete PS200 Unit 4 paper explaining why two composite trainees remembered the same protocol differently, using encoding and retrieval research.

Why did the second trainee remember more in the PS200 Unit 4 sample?

Writing what each question detects processed the protocol for meaning, and deep processing produces stronger memory than rereading.