-----. - . , A

/

THE CONCEFT MAP: A TOOL FOR

LEARNING SCIENCE CONCEPTS AND UNDERSTANDING

COGNITIVE PROCESSES OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS - A CASE STUDY

by

Mary Wong Siew Lian

A Thesis Submitted

in Fulfhent of the Requirement

for the Degree of Master of Science

in Cognitive Psychology

Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development

UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SARAWAK

January 1997

DEDICATION

To my family members and friends, without whose encouragement and

support this thesis WOUM mt have been possible,

No portion of the wark ~ : f d to in this thesis has subd*d in 5uppd elf im.

qpflcatioa for mother degree or qualifacation of fhis or my other dversity or MWon

I would WE tc, extend my sincere gratitude and apprecia~on to my or,

hfessor Dr. Rmdi bin Arof for his invaluable advice, gukbnce, and support throu@out

the course of my research. My sincere and appreciatioflt also go to Dr. Baji Abang

d Ri- the co-supervisor for this research, Dr. b z a k Mabitj 0, and

Dr. Richard Redding (fJniversity of V' for their helpful comments and advice

cam*g this r e e k

I am phularfy grateful to Jacinta Wong Ling Hutg, Noos A h A

Oon Hock for their assistance in the validation of the test

to Jacinta ulho marked all the essay mwm-scripts in this research.

I would also Eke to Mr. E w b g Agas, the Principal of Bahr Lintmg

Teachers' College, for permission to hvofve tfie pre-stxvke Zear;hers as subjects csf my

study. My sincere to &e fow groups of pre-service teachem who particbd in

thlci study.

Last but not least, my h: torhestaffof

members, C O M ~ friends, and all others who have mdesed assistawe and supprt in

om way or anotheb.

ABSTRACT

This case study focused on the concept map as a tool for learning science concepts and

understanding cognitive processes of presedvice science teachers. Ninety-nine presetvice

science teachers from Batu Lintang Teachers' College, Kuching, participated in this study.

A comparison of subjects' performance in the pre- and posttreatmeat achievement tests

showed that subjects who were taught science concepts using concept mapping performed

significantly better @ < -01) than subjects who were taught using the lecture method. The

concept map was also used to gain insights into the knowledge organization of high-

achievers and low-achievers through quantitative content analysis of their concept maps.

Cornlatiom between subjects' achievement and their concept map characteristics revealed

that compared tQ low-achievers, high-achieves consbucted better and more complex

concept maps with more appropriate concepts, more appropriate lids, cross-I&, and

c o a t hierafchical ordering of concepts. This study also inquired into differences in h@-

achievers' and low-achievers' knowledge processing m concept mapping. Pos&matment

interviews which focused on how subjects went about mapping concepts revealed that

high-achievers were more thorough m the concept mapping process, taking time to

idea* concept meanings before forming the relevant Idcages between concepts. The

low-achievezs, however, expended less effort at cognitive processing of knowledge during

concept mapping. In addition, the effect of the use of high-achievers' concept maps to

teach low-achievers science concepts was 8150 investigated. Postireatment inkwiews and

qualitative content analysis of concept maps revealed that low-achievers did not really

benefit iiom the use of such an approach.

ABSTRAK

Kajian kes ini memberi fokus kepada penggunaan peta konsep untuk mempelajari konsep

konsep sains dan mengeaali proses kognisi guru-guru saiDs pra-peakhidmatan. Seramai

sembilan puluh sembilan orang guru sains pra-perkhidmatan dari Maktab Pesguruan Batu

Lintang, Kuching, telah dilibatkan dalam kajian ini. Kajian perbandingan p a p a i a n

subjek menunjukkm pehbezaan yang sipifkm @ < .01) antara lcumpulan subjek yang

diajar konsep sains menggmakan kaedah pebne&an konsep dan kumpulan subjek yang

diajar m e a q p d m lcaedah kuliah. Peta konsep juga digunakan untuk menyiasat tentang

organismi pgetahuan Inrmpulan subjek yang beqencapaian tinggi dan kumpulan subjek

yang beqmcapaian mdah melalui analisis lamtitatif pe& konsep mmka. Dapatan

menunjukkan kumpulan subjek yang lmpencapaian tinggi menghasiUcan peta konsep yang

lebih baik dan kompleks yang menganchmgi lebih banyak konsep dan ikatan antara konsep

yang behit, "c ro s s -W dm susunan k0nse.p-konsep secara be&kaki y a q betul

bexbanding dengan kumpdan subjek yang berpencapaian mdah. Kajian ini juga

menyiasat tentang pexbezaan dalam cara subjek berpencapaian tinggi dan subjek

bexpencapaian rendah memproses pengetahuan seaaasa pesne&an konsep, Hasil kajian

menunjukkan lampulan subjek yang be'pencapaian tinggi lebih teliti dalam proses

pemetaan konsep. Mmka meluangkan masa untuk mengenafpasti makna konsep sebelum

membuat pkaitan yang releven antara komep-konsep. Kumpulan subjek yang

beqencapaian rendah pula didapati tidak begitu b m - s u n g g u h dalam peinprosesan

maklumat secara kognitif semasa p e t a a n konsep. Kajian juga telah menyiasat tentang

kesan meqguna peta konsep hasilan kumpulan subjek berpe.ncapaian tinggi untuk

-ajar kcmsepkonsep sains kepada kumplltan subjek bqencapaian readah. Dapatan

menuqjukbn pen&- ini kurang bermanfaat kepada kumpulan subjek btrpencapaian

rendah.

vi

CONTENTS

ACICNOW'LEDGEMENTS

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF HGURES

CHAPTER 1 . THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

1.1 Introduction

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

CHAPTER 2

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2 5

The Statemeat of the Problem

objectives Of The Study

Hypotheses

S i ~ ~ e Of The Study

D e m o n Of Terms

LfTERAmRENtEW

In-tion

Contributions of Cognitive Psychology

concept Mapping

Methods of Co~~f:pt Mapping

The Concept Map as a Learning Tool

2.6 Assessment in Concept Mapping

2.7 'IEe Concept Map as a Research Tool

Page

iv

v

vi

vii

X

X

1

1

2

7

7

8

9

16

16

17

26

28

34

43

46

CHAPTER 3 . 3.1

3.2

33

3.4

3.5

CB[APTE]R 4

4.1

4.2

4 3

CHAPTER 5 . .

METHOD

Inlmhxtion

Subjects

Jilsmmedlts

Procedure

Statistical Analysis

FLM)INGS AM) DISCUSSION

In4miwtion

Comparison of Subjects' Science Achievement

Correlations Between Achievement and

Concept Map C h a r a c t e ~ s

Diffmces in High-Achievm' and

Low-Achievers' Knowledge Processing in

a-t M w P ~ ~

The Effect of Using High-Achievers'

Concept Maps to Teach Low-Achieveas

Science Concepts

CONCLUSION

Summary

Implications of the Study

Suggestions for Further R e m h

Page

50

50

50

51

54

63

64

64

64

Page

APPENDXmS

A Students' Profile

B Iistmment X and Marking Scheme

C Instmnent Y and Marking Scheme

D Interview Questions

E In&oduction to Concept Mapping

F Sample Nigh-Achievers' e0-t Maps

G PosttreaQapldnt Co1~~ep2 Mapping Exrrscise

H Sample High-Achievers' and Low-Achievers' Concept Maps

f Interview T m r i p t s - Interviews with High-Achieve=

and Low-Achievers

J Interview Transcripts - Interviews with Low-Achievers

K Interview ripts - Interviews with chievers

LIST OF TABLES

Table

3.4 Schedule of Treatments

Page

55

4.2a Means, Standard Deviations and ?-Tests Comparing Pretest

Scores of the Treatment and Non-Treatment Groups 66

4.2b Means, Standard Deviations and t-Tests Comparing Pretest and

Posttest Scores of the Treatment and Non-Treatment Chups 67

4 .2 Means, Standard Deviations and ?-Tests Comparing Posttest ,

Scorn of the Treatment and Non-Tmatment Groups

4.26 Meaas, Standard Deviations and t-Tests Compafing Meaa

Oain Scores of the Treatment and Non-Treatment Groups

4.3 Correlations Between Achievement and Five Concept Map

characteristics

LIST OF F?GlBES

Figure

3.4 Sample "ideal" Map

Page

6 1

4,3a A High-Achiever's Concept Map 75

4.3b A Low-Achiever's Concept Map 76

5.la Concept Mapping - aa Effective Tool for Learning Science

Concepts 9 1

5. lb High-Achievers' and tow-Achievers' Concept Maps 92

Figure Page

5,lc High-Achievers' Knowledge Prowsing in Concept Mapping 93

5,ld Low-Achievers' Knowledge Pr-ing in C3mcept Mapping 94

5.Ie Low-Achievers' Difficulty in Unde~tanding High-Achievers'

eo-t Maps 95

5,lf High-Achievers' Laming of Science Concepts 96

CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Introduction

In recent years, science education in Malaysia has been given greater

emphasis as the nation heads towards building a society which is more

knowledgeable and skilled in science and technology. This move is necessary

because of the increasing demand for skilled rnan-power in the industrial field and

the need to equip the future generation to meet the challenges of a world that is

becoming increasingly science and technology oriented. As a result much

emphasis is being placed on science education in schools and other institutions of

learning throughout the nation.

l%is emphasis is evident with the recent introduction of Science to the new

Integrated Primary School Curriculum (Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum, 1993,

October), starting with Year Four students. The aim of this move is not only to

expose students to science education but also to inculcate an mterest in science at

an early age. Efforts are also being made to stress the importance of science and

promote intenst in science at the secondary and higher levels of education. For

example, under the Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (Kurikulum

Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah) implemented in 1988, aIl students have to study

Science until Form Five. In addition, they are encouraged to take up subjects such

as Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Additional Science at the upper secondary

level. At the Form Six level, there has been a revision in the Chemistry, Physics

and Biology syllabuses with the aim to motivate more students to take up science

2

subjects. Among the steps to promote interest in science and technology are:

1) road shows targeted at creating more enthusiasm among secondary school

students about the world of science through "dramatic and vivid experiments, 2)

involving students in innovative and creative science projects and competitions

during science and technology exhibitions, and 3) t a b on the importance of

science and job opportunities in the field of science and technology.

Apart from the above changes in the curriculum and efforts at promoting

interest in science and technology, steps are also being taken to improve the

quality of science teaching and learning. These include: 1) providing in-&e

training to upgrade science teachers' knowledge and skill in teaching science, 2)

encouraging the use of studentcentered instructional strategies, and 3) allocating

more funds for scientific equipment and improvement of school laboratory

facilities.

All these steps are being taken with the aim to increase students' interest

in science and technology and to improve their achievement in science subjects.

The Statement of the Problem

Tbe efforts of the Malaysian Education Ministry to promote interest in

science and technology and improve the teaching and learning of science subjects

is indeed commendable. However, statistics show that students' performance in

science subjects is still not up to the expected standard Recent figures released

by the Examination Syndicate, Ministry of Education, showed a decline in

students' performance in science subjects in the 1994 secondary school public

examinations. The perfoxmance of students in Form Six Biology and Physics

suffered a drop of 5.66% and 37% respectively in the percentage of passes

3

compared to the 1993 results (Chan & de Paul, 1995). In the Form Five

examinations, students' performance in Additional Science and Biology dropped

by 4.3% and 1.0% respectively in the percentage of passes compared to the 1993

results (Jayakrishnan & Tan, 1995). A report of a detailed analysis of students'

science performance in the above examination (Lembaga Peperiksaan, 1995, June)

stated that students generally had poor understanding of science concepts and

wuld not answer questions which required higher cognitive skills such as

knowledge application, analysis of diagrams and charts and problem-solving.

Similar reports of analyses of students' performance in Form Tbree Science

(Lembaga Pepebiksaan, 1994, February and 1995, April) also stated that students

faced Wiulty m answering higher-order questions which required an

u n a d i n g of science concepts and application of scientific knowledge. These

findings indicate that s t u h t s lack indepth u n a d i n g of science concepts and

are unable to transfer learning to other situations.

A decline in students' achievement in science has also been noticeable in

other parts of the world. According to Bybee and Robertson (1992), then have

been reports (Weiss, 1978,1987; Mullis & Jenkins, 1988) of decline in students'

achievement in science and widespread support for reforms in science education

in America in the late 1980s. Koballa (1988) and Mason and Kahle (1989),

through interviews with students, found that most of them had difficulty

understanding sciexe concepts and considered science to be boring, a list of big

words and facts, intimidating, and not relevant to their lives. A study by Mason

(1992) found that pre-service science teachers themselves held somewhat fuzzy,

if not inaccurate, knowledge of various scientific concepts and were unable to

explain how various concepts were related. This lack of interest m science and

4

poor understanding of science concepts amongst both students and potential

science teachers has been a matter of grave concern in recent years.

Re-h was conducted to find out the reasons for this lack of

understanding of science concepts and poor science achievement of students.

According to Bybee and Robertson (1992), researchers such as Weiss (1987) and

Mullis and Jenkins (1988) found that science instruction in schools tended to be

dominated by teacher lectures and reading the textbook. Tobin, Capie and

Bettemourt (1988) cited studies which reported that: 1) science teachers

emphasized facts and techniques with little emphasis on inquiry (Stake & Easley,

1978), 2) teachers emphasized completion of academic work (to the possible

detriment of student undmtanding of the science content) so that students could

cover the course content and perform well on tests gobin & Gallagher, 1987;

Gallagher, 1985), and 3) Sanford (1985), noted that science teachm reduced

cognitive demands of academic bsks though: giving too much guidance until

relatively little work was left to students; group work where students copied from

one anothes, open-book tests; using easy or familiar contents on tests; grading on

completion rather than accuracy; aad assigning more marks to memory or

procedural components of a task. In most of the above cases, instruction did not

provide opportunities for students to engage actively in cognitive processing of

information during learning. Novak (1988) and his team of researchers, tbrough

dozens of interviews with secondary school students and university students found

that the majority of them were not organizing infomation into meaningful

cognitive frameworks during learning. Instead they wexe primarily learning by

rote.

5

Meanwhile, advances in educational research, particularly in the field of

Cognitive Psychology, have led to a better understanding of how learning takes

place. An area of research termed constructivism put forward the idea that

learning involves the active cognitive construction of knowledge and conceptual

change. During learning, new conceptions are integrated with prior conceptions

and alternative conceptions or misconceptions may be discarded. The

establishment of co~ections between new and existing conceptions suggest an

integration of concepts within a subject matter. According to the constructivist

view, learning involves the active participation of the learner in forming

appropriate connections between concepts in order to acquire an integrated

understanding of the m a e a l learned. Cognitive conceptions of learning also

emphasized the importance of organizing knowledge in an orderly manner, that

is, him-, so as to facilitate recall and application of the material learned.

Efforts were made to translate these new conceptions of learning into classroom

practices and concept mapping is one of the pedagogical tools towards this end.

Studies by Novak and his team of researchers at Comell University

(Novak, 1981; Symington & Novak, 1982; Novak, Gowin & Johansen, 1983)

seemed to indicate that concept mapping is an effective tool for helping students

learn science concepts. More recent studies by Novak and Musonda (1991),

Jege.de, Alaiyemola and Okebukola (1990), Pankratius (1990) and Horton et a1

(1993) also showed that concept mapping enhanced science achievement of

students. In view of the above promising findings concerning concept mapping,

it is considered worthwhile to fiuthex explore the efficacy of this strategy.

Moreover, in Malaysia, according to information from the Educational Planning

and Research Division, Ministry of Education (de Silva, K, personal

6

communication, May 18, 1995), there is as yet no record of previous research on

concept mapping.

Apart from its use as a learning tool, the concept map has also been found

to be useful as a tool for cognitive research (Novak & Gowin, 1984; Starr &

Krajcik, 1990; Novak & Musonda, 1991). A number of researchers (Fraser &

Edwards, 1985; Novak, 1988) have noted that there is a positive relationship

between student achievement and the quality of their concept maps. They found

that high-achieving students produced wncept maps which were more complex

and had better hierarchical organization of concepts than low-achieving students.

A more detailed study on the relationship between achievement and specific

concept map characteristics would provide further insights into differences in high-

achiever and low-achievex knowledge organization.

The above-mentioned studies indicate that there is a difference in the

stmctwe and complexity of high-achievers' and low-achievers' concept maps. This

leads to the question of how the thought processes of high-achievers and low-

achievers differ as they map concepts. What are the cognitive processes which

contribute to cliff-es in the structure and content of their concept maps? It

would be interesting to inquire closely into the thought processes which mak the

difference in the way they proceh knowledge during wncept mapping.

A related question in this study is whether the use of high-achievers'

concept maps to teach low-achievers science concepts will improve their

understanding of science concepts. Will low-achievers learn science concepts more

effectively though examining the concept maps generated by their peers, the high-

achievexs? The fin- from such an inquiry will have important bearing on peex-

teaching and how to help low-achievers improve in their learning of scieace

1.3 Objectives of the Study

This study therefore aimed to further explore the eficacy of the concept

map as a tool for learning science concepts, to gain insights into differences in

high-achievers' and low-achievers' cognitive processes, and to investigate the effect

of using high-achievers' concept maps to teach low-achievers scimce concepts.

Specifically, this study aimed to:

i) determine whether concept mapping improves pre-service teachers'

u11-W of science concepts.

hi) examine the r e l a t i o m between achievement and concept map

characteristics.

iii) find out how high-achievers and low-achievers differ with respect to the

way they process knowledge in concept mapping.

iv) find out the effect of the use of high-achievers' concept maps to teach low-

achievers science concepts.

1.4 Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were put forward for the objectives in this study:

1.4.1 Subjects taught science concepts using concept mapping will achieve

higher scores m the achievement test than subjects taught science concepts

using the lecture method.

1.4.2 There is a positive correlation between achievement scores and

i) the number of appropriate links in the map,

ii) the average number of appropriate concepts per cluster.

iii) the hierarchy score for the map

1.4.3 There is a negative correlation between achievement scores and

i) the number of inappropriate links in the map,

ii) the avmge number of inappropriate concepts per cluster.

1.4.4 High-achievers' knowledge processing in concept mapping diffm from that

of low-achievm' m that high-achievers are more thorough at mapping

concepts than are low-achieveas.

1.4.5 Low-achievers' learning of science concepts through high-achievers'

concept maps is more effective than through their own construction of

concept maps.

1.5 The Significance of the Study .

Tbe findings of this study will be of benefit to teachers and teachex-

educators in search of more effective strategies for the teaching and learning of

science concepts. If concept mapping is indexxi effective in enhancing scieace

achieveanent of students through helping them to organize and conssrmct

knowledge efficiently, then its use as an instructional tool in the leaming of

scieme concepts &odd be more widely encouraged.

The findings on the correlation between concept map characteristics and

student achievement will provide information on how the knowledge organization

of high-achievers and low-achievers differ. These fmdings will be beneficial to

teachers who intend to use the concept map as a tool for cognitive-based

assessment.

This study will also provide insights into how high-achieveas and low-

achievers process knowledge in concept mapping. The insights gained will be

useful to teachers in taking steps to improve stu&nts' understanding of science

concepts through concept mapping.

The investigation on the effect of using high-achievers' concept maps to

teach low-achievers science concepts will provide information on how peer-

teaching through concept mapping can be improved.

1.6 Definition of Terms

The terms used in this study are &fined as follows:

1.6.1 The term "conceptm refm to "a perceived regularity in events or objects

designated by a label" (Novak, 1988, p. 82). For example, the word "chair"

conceptualizes an object .with legs, a seat, and a back, that is used for

sitting on. Novak (cited in Ahlberg, 1993, p. 9) also used the &finition

"concepts are what we think with". Ahlbedg (1993, p. 9) &fined concepts

as "basic elements of thhkhg". Klausmeier (1993, p. 285) said, "a concept

consists of an individual's organized information about one or more things

- objects, events, ideas, processes or relations that enables the individual

to discriminate a particular thing or class of things from other things or

classes of things and also to relate it to otber things or classes of things."

10

According to Reber (1985), the term "concept1' refers to the internal,

psychological representation of a complex of objects which share some

attributefs) or properties. In this study, the term "concept" is used to refer

to an individual's mental representation of objects, events, ideas or

processes.

1.6.2 A concept map is a schematic device used to enable the learner to

explicitly represent a number of concepts. A concept map in its simplest

form consists of just two concepts connected by a linking word to fom

a proposition. For example, "sky is blue" is a proposition consisting of

two concepts, "sky" and ''blue" and a linking word, "is" (Novak &

Gowin, 1984, p. 15). Propositions therefore consist of two or more

concepts semantically "linked'' together by linking words. A complex

concept map consists of many concept labels embedded m a framework of

propositions. In this study, the term "concept map" is used to refer to a

complex concept map.

1.6.3 Concept mapping, according to Novak and Gowm (1984), is the process

of organizing concepts and relationships between concepts in a hierarchical

manner, from more inclusive co~~;epts to more specific, less inclusive

concepts. Concept maps are hierarchical m that the more genezal, more

inclusive concepts are at the top of the map, with progressively more

specific, less inclusive concepts arranged below them. The term "concept

mapping used in this study refers to the process of organizing concepts

~~~hically and fonning meanmgful relatiomhips between the concepts.

I1

1.6.4 CInstes ar chunks are generally used tx, refa to groups of superoraafe

and linked dodinate (at least two) wncepts. Fur exarapfe ia a concept:

map on plantsd h e concept "flowers" (a tmpmmka& concep9 may be

linked with concepts such as "nectarn and "pet&" (subordinate concepts)

to fomi a cluster of ~ 0 ~ 0 s . The tt:m " ~ 1 ~ " will be used in this study

to refer to wups of related concepts a concept map.

1.6.5 Crass-links refer b meaningful comectiom Wweegl one sep& of the

concept. f i i d y snd mo&m segment (kJovak & Gowin, 1984) that is,

between concepts belonging to dEmnt clwbrs in the map. For example

k the abovememttiuned c q n q on plan& the superonhab concepts

"flowm" and "stems" may be finkied to s u m t e concepts such as

"p&aW and leaves" rmpedvely. " P ~ " may also be: linked to the

concept "twt", Howerer the c m p t "reda m y also h litlked to "leaves"

(a m e p t in a diffkrent ~~) as some hvess am red in colour. The link

formal between "I.ed" and leaves" is a cross-link. In the F n t studysbudy,

"@ross-links" is used to refer to lidages betwees concepts be10nging to

diff6?xex& clusteks in a concept map.

1.6.6 Cognitive prwmsm, tm & F i by N h (1967), refem to all the

pmmxm by which .the sensory input is tmn&"md reduced, stored,

m v d aod usad The tenn wgnibivff pl3ce?fses is often used

synmymwsfy with cogoitia. Ilccum to Andamn (1994), cognition

comprises all mental activity or states involved in knowing and the mind's

functr;onhg, and h W pmcqtion, attmtioa, memory, imagery,

12

language functions, devebpaaental processes, problenr-solving and the area

of artificial intelligence (which lies outside the discipline of psychology).

Math (19%) categorized cognitive processes info: 1) basic cognitive

processes which include a) perceptual processes sx~ch as attention and

pattern recognition, and b) memory processes such as infomation

processing, and 2) higher-order cogaitive processes such as imagery,

problem-solving, reasoning, decision making, language comprehension and

production, and mebcognition.

Perception has to do with attaching m&g to sensory infomation

received. Reber (1983, described perceptual processes as those processes

that give coherence and unity to seawry input It invoives such processes

as attention and pattern re~oelion. Attentiion is often consi&red as a state

of concentrating on something. As J-es (cited in Caiotb:, 1994, p. 95) put

it, "it is the taking possession by the mind, in clear and vivid form, of one

out of what seem several simultaneously possible objects or trains of

thought, It implies withdrawal from some things in order to deal

effectively with others."

Pattern recognition concerns how we recognize the eanvironmental

stimuli as exemph of concepts akmdy in memory (Leahey & H d ,

1993). Reba (3985) defines it as the act of recognizing that a particular

array of s h d w elements or sequence of s h d w elements is

representative of a particdm pattern. Attention and pattern recognition

occur to help iden* and select information for further processing.

13

Memoacy p ~ ~ ~ e s s e s refer to those processes wbich store and retrieve

information. According to Gaiotti (1994) memory is seen to be an active,

constructive process. The Wornation does not "sit sti21" in the storehouse

waiting ta be re&ievd. Instead, it appears &at some further processing of

the information occurs, either during storage ox at tbe time of retrieval.

][nformation processing, as dehed by Reber (f985), refers to the notion

of organking, inkrprethg and responding to h c infomation.

Incoming information is initially processed in the short-tpdm memory or

working memory where it is held just long enough (about 30 seconds) for

a decision to be made about W e r processing, especially mcading for

long-term storage. The information in working memory may also include

infomatJcrn which has been retrieved &om the tong-tE:m memory a d

which is interacting with the new stimulus infomation e the

m m o q system, tong-tam memory is another component of information

p r m * and it involves processes such as e n d g and recail. EeGodjng

refm to the process of transforming information into one or n.1~111: forms

of represeatation sa that it can be retained in long-term memory

@enjafie1&, 1992). Recall is the process of retrieving i n f o d o n from

memory. b o d i n g and mall an: closely related especially as the method

of encoding can affect the ease of retrieval.

The higher-order cognitive processes include those processes

associated with more complex fonns of cognition. h g e r y , according to

I Z h (19851, is a cognitive process that operates "as if" one had a m e d

picture that was im analag of a d-world scene. m e image is not

nw&Xy treated as a reproduction of an earlier event, but rather as a