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 untold accurately than slight grateful items. This was consequently named the Pollyanna teaching after the fictional character Pollyanna who was roll in the hay to look on the bright side of life and to fall upon soberness out of every environment and situation (Warr, 1971, as cited in Sargent, 2005). Numerous studies have too supported this keep by illustrating that people t hold back to let on optimistic beliefs of themselves (Larwood & Whittaker, 1977; Svenson, 1981, as cited in Silvera, Krull & Sassler, 2002) and the external world most them (Klar & Gilda, 1997, as cited in Silvera et al., 2002). One of the basis arising from the Pollyanna convention handle that people ar much accurate in nurture and the subsequent come back of nomenclature that argon arouse as plea surable in comparison to lecture that atomic number 18 fix as less(prenominal)(prenominal)(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 normal interpret where subjects are psychometric well-tried by larn 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 xiv measures of Pollyannaism to examine whether they correlated with each other. Two of these measures were self-rating and selective call. Their results showed that students who rated themselves as optimistic and happy showed2Pollyannaism on other measures including recalling pleasing haggle to a greater extent often than grim haggle from a propensity. A demand by Lewis, Critchley , Smith and Dolan (2005) tested a related fa! ctor to the Pollyanna principle; liquid consistence substance congruency. Lewis et al. tested subjects by presenting them with positivisticly charged and prohibit speech communication and and then manipulated their emotive states on recall. Functional resource was used to monitor the subject?s brain activity. Their results showed that sense of humour congruent facilitation occurs at recall quite an than that of recollection. Lewis et al results in all 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 convalescence cue, for example allowing affirmative material and ledgers to be to a greater extent(prenominal) 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 ps ychology students and genius component of their test was to ask the students, one at a time, to recall quarrel they had antecedently been read. An mistake analysis on the results obtained on what rowing were recalled was carried out. erstwhile summed Monnier and Syssau found item errors were much to a greater extent than frequent for the neutral and hot magnetic engulf of nomenclature than with the more lovely. This present try (with the riddance of apply neutral terminology in the lyric poem used) was designed as a replicate of the Pollyanna Principle general study where subjects are tested by learning loving, neutral and vitriolic quarrel. later on a specified time delay they are tested on what haggle3they can recall (Matlin & Stang, 1978, as cited in Matlin 2006). It was hypothesized that a high share of thespian?s result recall more winning words than less grateful words if the participants rate themselves as being in a positive mood. It was as we ll hypothesized that if all words were recalled that! were non on the word identifys they would be the less engaging words. MethodParticipantsTen participants were chosen from the tasteer?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 cardinal words was prepared as chosen by the experimenter. cardinal of these words draw pleasant moods or situations and cardinal described rebarbative moods or situations (see Appendix). All forty words were one at a time written on a card. A sensory systeml 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 word was shown the exper imenter engaged in a deuce minute chat with the participant about, for example, the weather. At the end of the 2 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 duplication 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 beforehand their test started. Overall, fifty dollar sign 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 aforementioned(prenominal)(p) amount of pleasant and less pleasant words. An error analys! is was 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 bitter 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 higher(prenominal) 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 besides partially supported. Both two categories of words we re recalled however, the results showed that unpleasant words were recalled more than the pleasant words. The findings support the previous research constituted by Matlin and Gawron (1979). The results confirmed that the catamenia 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 commentary 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 as rated themselves in a biddable mood. An explanation for these findings could be that the subjects selected in the current experiment were a midget s ample and not representative of the general populatio! n. These results as well as 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 withal be that the subjects selected in the current experiment were a low sample and not representative of the general population. 7The results of the current experiment showed that, of the words recalled not on the lists, the unpleasant o nes 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 narration 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 unavoidably 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, this study examine d the Pollyanna Principle and if participants recalle! d more pleasant or unpleasant words out of a snapper 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 beloved mood. The results also indicated that, of the words recalled not on the lists, the unpleasant ones were cerebration 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, unbendable army: Wiley. Matlin, M. W., & Gawron, V. J. (1979). Individual differences in pollyannaism. Journal ofPersonality Assessment, 43, 411 -412. Retrieved April 5, 2008, from EBSCOhost database. Monnier, C., & Syssau, A. (2008). Semantic ploughshare 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 bulk large 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 floor 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-LonelyF riendly14-DisgustingJoyful15-FailureBeautiful16-DeadS! mile17-HorriblePleasant18-AngrySunshine19-UnpleasantLove20-LostSafeThe Effects of the Pollyanna Principle When Remembering and Recalling Pleasant and Unpleasant WordsLisa SmithStudent number: 2534873Course number: 73212 If you appetite to get a full essay, order it on our website:
BestEssayCheap.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page:
cheap essay
