LEARNING STYLE INVENTORY

Introduction:

A Learning Style Inventory is a tool used to identify individual preferences and approaches to
learning. It assesses factors like sensory modalities (visual, auditory, kinesthetic), environmental
preferences (quiet, interactive), and cognitive strategies (analytical, intuitive). By understanding one's
dominant learning style, educators can tailor teaching methods to optimize learning outcomes and
accommodate diverse learning preferences.

Learning styles:

 Visual - Visual learners are more likely to remember information when it is presented
visually,
such as through arrows, diagrams, charts, symbols, and so on.

 Auditory - Auditory learners are sometimes referred to as "aural" learners, as they prefer to
listen to information presented to them verbally.

 Reading - Reading and Writing learners focus on the written word and are more likely to
perform well when they can reference written text.

 Kinesthetics - Kinesthetic learners are physically active and are more hands-on in their
coursework, which is why they tend to perform well in scientific studies.

VARK categorizes learning styles into Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, and Kinesthetic preferences,
helping individuals identify their dominant learning mode for effective study strategies and teaching
approaches.

Methodology:

Problem: To assess learning preferences of the subject using the learning styles inventory by Dr. S.V
Surya Rekha.

Plan: The learning style inventory is administered and scored and the learning preferences of the
subject is identified.
Materials:
1. The Learning Style Inventory with 40 questions.
2. Scoring Key and norms
3. Writing Materials

Procedure:
The subject is seated comfortably and given a copy of the learning styles inventory. The

instructions are given. The inventory is self-administered. After the subject completes the inventory,

the experimenter scores the responses and analyses the subject’s learning preference referring to

the norms.

Instructions:
“Given below are several statements about your preferences while learning. Read each

statement and put a tick mark next to it if you agree with it. If you do not agree with the statement,

do not put any mark against it. This is not a timed test but work as fast as you can.

Controls:
1. Make sure the subject has understood the instructions.
2. Avoid giving additional contextual or situational information as this may bias the response to

the questionnaire.

3. The subject should be instructed to answer the questions for himself/herself and not for
others.

Analysis of Results:
7-10 High preference, 4-6 Moderate preference, 1-3 Low preference
 Results and Discussion:

The scores of the subject are mentioned below:

Table 1. Individual Scores in Learning Styles Inventory

Name Categories Score Preference Learning Style

PNM Visual 9 High
Aural 8 High Visual/Aural/Kinesthetic
Read/ write 6 Moderate
Kinesthetic 8 High

The subject is a 18-year-old female student at Christ University Yeshwanthpur Campus whose

learning style is being assessed in this report. The subject got a score of 9, 8, 6, 8 respectively in

Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinaesthetic categories respectively.

Conclusion
The subject has a high score in Visual, Aural and Kinesthetic Learning styles indicating that the
subject has high preference for Visual and Aural and Kinesthetic Learning Style.
 SERIAL VERBAL LEARNING
Introduction:

Learning is acquiring knowledge, skills, or understanding through study, experience, or teaching,

leading to personal development.

Serial verbal learning is a method used in psychology to study memory. Participants are asked to
memorize a list of items presented sequentially, and then recall them in order immediately or after a
delay, testing memory retention and retrieval processes.

The memory drum experiment has led to the formation of various theories:

1. Serial Position Effect: Primacy and Recency effects: they observe better recollection of
words at the starting (primacy) and ending (recency) of the sequence.
2. Short-Term Memory (STM)
3. Long-Term Memory (LTM)
4. Schema theory

Methodology:

Aim: To study the processes involved in the memorization of nonsense syllables by the method of
serial learning

Plan: To conduct the test on the subject using the memory drum apparatus

Materials:

The materials needed for this experiment are:

1. Memory drum apparatus

2. Stimulus material

(List of 10 non-sense syllables must be in CVC formation consonant-vowel-consonant

- XEP, BUJ, SIQ, JOR, WUF, PAH, KEC, NOL, ZIK, TAQ)

3. Stopwatch

4. Screen
[Stimulus material -]

This list of ten nonsense syllables needs to be entered vertically on the memory drum.

Subject Details:

Name: A.R

Age: 18 yrs.

Sex: Female

Education: First-year undergraduate student.

Design: The subject will be shown the above List of 10 Non-Sense Syllables ONE BY ONE each
Syllable for 2 sec. Only the ‘S’ will be required to RECALL the syllables in the same order with 20
second's time. Then the Second Trial will start and the subject will again be shown the entire list one
by one, each syllable for 2 sec, and the 'S' will be given 20 sec. time for Serial Recall. The process
(TRIALS) will be repeated till the 'S' recalls the entire list of Non-sense Syllables ERRORLESSLY in
TWO CONSECUTIVE TRIALS.

Procedure:

The subject will be shown the above List of 10 Non-Sense Syllables ONE BY ONE each Syllable for 2
seconds only. The subject will then be required to RECALL the syllables in the same order within 20
seconds. Then the Second Trial will start and the subject will again be shown the entire list one by
one, each syllable for 2 seconds, and the subject' will be given 20 seconds for Serial Recall. The
process (TRIALS) will be repeated till the subject recalls the entire list of Non-sense Syllables
ERRORLESSLY in TWO CONSECUTIVE TRIALS.

Controls/Precautions:

1. Standardization: Make sure that the SVLT is administered and scored using a manual memory
drum in accordance with approved standardized protocols.
2. Establishing up a peaceful, distraction-free testing environment will help test takers focus as much
as possible.

3. Calibration: To guarantee the manual memory drum operates accurately and consistently, calibrate
and maintain it on a regular basis.

Analysis:

Examine the participant's performance on the manual memory drum in order to evaluate many
elements, such as:

• Word Recall: The number of words remembered right away following each presentation.

• Word Recall in the Short Term: The quantity of words remembered after a brief interval.

• Long-Term Recall: The quantity of words retained during a protracted period of time.

• Recognition: The capacity of the participant to pick out words from the first list amidst distractions.

Results and Discussion

The serial verbal learning was assessed by presenting the nonsense syllables to the subject
via a memory drum. The responses and results of the subject are shown below.
Table 1

Responses of the participant

Trial Number Errors Time (seconds)

1 4 20

2 2 20

3 2 20

4 2 20

5 0 20
 Results

The results of the subject show that they were able to remember all the nonsense syllables
correctly as well as their order in 5 trials. The subject was able to remember the syllables accurately
by associating their sound with already existing words. They used mental imagery to remember the
order of the syllables.

Conclusion

The subject was able to successfully remember the syllables and their order by employing
techniques that suited them.

HABIT INTERFERENCE

Introduction:

A habit is a routine behavior or action that is regularly repeated, often occurring subconsciously or
with minimal conscious effort, typically acquired through frequent repetition and reinforcement.

Habit interference or Negative Transfer refers to the inhibition of performance produced by prior
learning- that is, when previous learning disrupts the performance of a subsequent task. In a new
situation, performance would be poorer than it would have been without previous training.

Methodology:

Aim: To study Negative transfer of training with the help of Card -sorting.

Hypothesis: Habit formation negatively influences new learning.

Plan: Conduct the experiment in two series, and compare the time scores.
Variables: a) Independent variable: Change in order of card sorting.

b) Dependent variable: Time score.

Experimental Controls:

a) The subject should not change his/her position during any part of the experiment.

b) The cards must be shuffled thoroughly.

c) Whenever the subject places a card in a wrong compartment, he/she has to rectify the mistake.

Materials:

a) Card sorting tray with two sections 'A' and 'B'. Each divided into four compartments. The order in
which designs are placed is different in the two sections.

b) A set of 40 cards (The cards consist of 4 subsets of 10 cards each. Each subset has a different
design).

c) Stop Clock.

Procedure:

Series 1: The card sorting tray is placed on a table.

The subject sorts the cards standing in front of the tray.

The cards are shuffled thoroughly, and the Subject is asked to hold the cards face-up.

The Subject is instructed that the pack of cards have different designs.

Section 'A' of the tray is placed which has four compartments, each marked with a design. The
Subject has to take each card, and place it in the compartment with the corresponding design.

When an error is made, the Subject has to pick up the card immediately and place it in the correct
compartment. T

he Subject has to work as fast as possible and try to reduce the time taken to sort from trial to trial.
But he/she must not sacrifice accuracy for speed.

Give five such trials and note down the time taken in each trial.

Series 2: On the sixth trial, Section 'B' of the tray is placed before the subject. The Subject is asked to
sort the cards again. The time taken is noted.

Instructions to the subject: "With the signal 'start' start sorting the cards into their respective
compartments of the tray. Whenever you place a card in the wrong compartment, place it back
correctly. Work fast".
Analysis of Data:

a) The time score of the sixth trial is compared with that of the fifth trial for evidence of the negative
transfer of learning in the Subject.

b) The average time score of the 6th trial is compared with the mean of the 5th trial for the group.

c) The time scores for all the six trials are plotted on a graph, both for the individual and the group.

Points for Discussion:

a) Discuss whether Negative Transfer of Learning has taken place, in the Subject as well as in the
group.

b) Discuss individual differences if any.

Introspection

The subject stated the following

The experiment was confusing at first because it was repetitive and it was really tough to understand
why the shuffled deck of card was being given again and again. The experimenter made sure that the
cards are properly shuffled which got me confused. The change in the board made me process the
sorting more but I eventually did it. But eventually it was an easy and fun task.

TABLE I. SHOWS THE TIME TAKEN (IN S) BY THE SUBJECT TO SORT THE CARDS IN EACH TRIAL

Section 'A' Section 'B'

Name/Trials 1 2 3 4 5 6

A.R 51.03 49 46.92 45.28 45.01 43.43

TABLE 2. SHOWING THE TIME TAKEN BY THE GROUP TO SORT THE CARDS IN EACH TRIAL

Section 'A' Section 'B'

Name/Trials 1 2 3 4 5 6

D.G 30 36 31 33 30 31

K.G 30 29 27 28 26 40

A.K 25 22 23 25 25 27

26.43 26.65 26.09 31.26 25.34 27.72

N.J 33 31 33 30 27 29
 42.61 34.95 31.62 29.43 29.81 38.01

B.S 52.06 47 42.93 43.93 48.60 46.21

N.V 32.84 31.47 25.92 30 25.7 28.8

A.K 30.18 27.88 27.67 25.01 23.42 26.05

A.K 30.01 33.25 28.04 29.42 28.06 33.47

DDR 33 39 36 35 36 36

Total 395.13 385.4 359.63 364.35 350.93 392.96

Mean 374.7333

Results and Discussion

The subject A.R is a 19-year-old undergrad student pursuing a psychology honours degree in Christ
(deemed to be University). The subject was enthusiastic to complete every successive trial faster
than the previous one. The 5th trial was completed in 4501 milliseconds but the 6th trial was
completed in 4343 milliseconds. The habit interference takes place. Thus, habit formation did not
negatively influence new learning. The hypothesis is rejected for the subject. The batch mean of the
experiment is 374.7333.

CONCEPT FORMATION:
Introduction:

A concept is a mental representation or idea that represents a category of objects, events, or

experiences, characterized by shared features or properties. Concepts help individuals organize and
understand the world around them.

Concept formation is the cognitive process through which individuals develop an understanding or
mental representation of a category or idea based on shared features or characteristics.
For example: The formation of the concept of time and calendar is used in various aspects of our
daily lives. We use calendars to keep track of important dates, appointments, and events.
 Methodology

Aim

To study the process of concept formation by prompting method using a concept formation
test based on Hanfmann and Kasanin test.

Hypothesis

1. Time taken in the test progressively Decreases as the combined concept of size and height is
formed.
2. Number Of errors committed in sorting the blocks progressively decreases as the combined
concept of size and height is formed.

Variables

Independent: 1. Size of the blocks

2. Height of the block

Dependent: 1. Time taken in sorting the blocks.

2. Errors committed in sorting the blocks

Extraneous variable: 1. Color of Blocks

2. Shape of blocks

Plan

The test is administered to the subjects of the group. The time taken and errors committed in
the process of forming the concepts are noted. Verbal reports made by the subject are analyzed.

Materials
 a. The concept formation test (Based on Hanfmann and Kasanin test). The test consists of 22
blocks differing in color, height, size, and shape. Each block has a number below it, which
tells us which set it belongs to.
b. Writing material and datasheet
[The 22 blocks can be divided into 4 sets. Sets 1 and 2 consisting of 5 blocks and 3 and 4 of 6
blocks each]

Experimental Controls

1. The blocks are properly mixed before starting the test.

2. The blocks are so kept that the subject is not able to see the numbers written below them.
3. The order of presentation is changed for each trial systematically.
4. There should be no disturbance when the subject takes the test.

Procedure

In this experiment, subjects are tasked with sorting blocks into four different groups based on a
sample block shown by the experimenter. Errors are noted and corrected, prompting learning of
proper block grouping. Time to complete sets and errors are recorded. Trials involve changing the
order of presentation. Successful sorting of all groups constitutes one trial.

Instruction

“This is a block. You have to select from among all the blocks the ones that go with the
sample block shown to you. They are categorized on the basis of some criteria.”

Analysis of Results

1. Note download the time taken and errors committed in each set for a trial.
2. Analyze the introspective report to find out the strategies and processes used in concept
formation.
[A verbal report of the subject must be taken for every group and not trial. Questions also may
be framed to elicit the appropriate verbal report]
 Results and Discussion

The concept formation experiment was conducted on the subject and their results are
depicted in the table below.

Table 2

Results of the subject

Trial Set Time Taken (minutes) Errors

1 1 3.51 6
3 1.36 4
2 4.14 9
4 1.56 6
2 3 1.38 3
2 1.45 3
4 0.38 7
1 1.54 4
3 2 2.06 8
4 0.44 7
1 0.47 0
3 1.21 7
4 4 0.51 2
1 0.36 4
3 0.39 3
2 1.49 7
5 1 0.21 3
4 0.28 0
3 0.45 2
2 0.40 1

Initially, the subject was merely trying to match the shapes in an interesting and fun way
according to their color. As the trials progressed however, the subject realized that there was a
pattern that could be associated with the shapes and once they understood it, they only went for the
shapes that fit the requirements of the experiment.
 The subject underwent all 5 trials as they kept making mistakes in choosing the blocks. This
indicates that the subject was unable to successfully form a concept regarding which blocks were to
be chosen and completed the experiment in the average number of trials, which indicates
abstraction, generalization and differentiation skills that are also average.

Conclusion

The subject has an average concept formation ability as they completed the experiment in 5
trials.

CUEING ON RECALL

Introduction:

Memory is the psychological process of gathering, storing, retaining, and later retrieving information.
The major processes involved in memory are encoding, storage, and retrieval. Memory is the term
given to the structure and processes involved in the storage and subsequent retrieval of information.

Cueing on recall refers to the use of hints or cues to aid in the retrieval of information from memory.
These cues can be external (e.g., environmental cues) or internal (e.g., related words or concepts),
and they serve to trigger memory recall by providing connections or associations to the information
being sought.

Recall is the process of retrieving information from memory. It involves accessing stored knowledge,
experiences, or events and bringing them into conscious awareness. Recall can occur spontaneously
or be triggered by external cues, and it is essential for tasks such as remembering facts, events, or
instructions.

Methodology:

Aim:

To compare recall under the two conditions of free and cued recall-each given in a separate

series.
Variables:

Independent variable: The presence of cues in the second series

Dependent variable: The number of words currently recalled in each list.

Materials:

1. Two lists of thirty words each where:

a) The words in list A are selected randomly.
b) The words in List B are selected in such a way that they fall into five categories with six words
in each category.
2. Plain response sheet for recall of list A
3. Response sheet with the names of the five categories printed on them for recall of List B
4. Stop Clock

Subject Details:

Name: P.N.M

Age: 18 yrs.

Sex: Female

Education: First-year undergraduate student.

Procedure:

Series 1- Free call.

Instruct the subject that the experimenter will present a list of words verbally. The subject must
listen carefully to recall them later. Present list A in an even tone at the rate of two seconds per word.
Then give the Subject plain response sheet and ask him/her to recall the list. Allow three minutes for
recall. Allow a five-minute rest pause before beginning the second series.

Series 2-Cued Recall.

Present list B in the same manner as list A. Then give the Subject the response sheet with the names
of the five categories and ask the Subject to write down as many words from the list as he/she can
recall. Allow three minutes for recall.

Instruction to the Subject

“Listen to the words alternatively as I read them out as you have to recall them later.”

Results and Discussion

The participant scored 13 out of 30 on the first list (List A) and 20 out of 30 on the second

list (List B).

The mean difference between the scores from lists A and B for the whole group was 8.57.

Table 1. Individual scores

Initials List A List B Difference (B-A)

P.N.M 13 20 7

Group score :

Mean Difference: 8.57

Standard Deviation of Difference: 3.18

 Conclusion

When the participant was presented with categorized cues like "stationary" or "flowers" for
the second word list, they recalled more words compared to the first list. This suggests that
providing cues based on categories improved memory retrieval. Similarly, the group of participants
also showed better recall for the second list, further supporting the positive effect of cued recall.

DEPTH PERCEPTION:
Introduction:

Perception refers to our sensory experience of the world. It is the process of using our senses to
become aware of objects, and relationships. Our perception of the world is not a static or fixed
process but rather a continuously evolving and adaptive one.

Depth perception is the ability to perceive the world in three dimensions, allowing us to
perceive objects' distance, size, and spatial relationships.

Aspects:

1. Spatial Awareness: Depth perception provides us with a sense of where objects are located
in space relative to ourselves and other objects

2. Perception of Size and Distance: Depth perception allows us to perceive the size and distance
of objects correctly.
3. Motor Skills and Coordination: Depth perception plays a vital role in hand-eye coordination
and motor skills.

Methodology:
Aim

To demonstrate experimentally the perception of depth

Hypothesis

1. There will be no difference in the error in perception of depth under the experimental series
of viewing approaching and reproach series.

Variables

Independent Variable- Approaching and Reproach condition.

Dependent Variable- Distance of perception of depth.

Materials

1. Depth perception box: It consists of a wooden box with 3 vertical black rods in a row, they
are at an equal distance from each other. They can be seen through the slit Against the white
background. On one side of the box, there is a light chamber and a milky white glass
separates the front part of the box, which acts as the background when illuminated. The
front side of the box has a rectangular slit with sliding windows to facilitate monocular and
binocular vision of the three rods inside the box in the white background. The middle rod is
moveable back and forth along the grove provided by pushing the knob on top. The other
two rods are stationary. The groove at the top of the box runs across the length of the box. A
metric scale is fixed along the groove to indicate the distance of the moveable rod from the
stationary rods.
2. Chin rest.
3. Writing materials.
Plan

Experiment with two series: a) approach series and b) reproach series. Find out and compare
the estimated errors of the subject in each series.

Procedure

a. Approach series: Keep the middle rod at the end (away from the subject’s eye) of the box.
Instruct the subject thus: “Keep your chin on the chin rest and remain stationary. Then look
through the slit with both eyes. You will see two stationary rods in the middle of the box.
With the start signal, I will move the middle rod which is at the other end, slowly towards
you. When it appears to have come to the line of the other two say “stop” and I shall stop
moving”. With these instructions and with the signal “start”, slowly move the middle rod
towards the subject until the subject reports the three rods are in a line. Note down the
reading of the pointer on the meter scale. Repeat the experiment with four more trials.
The error in judgment is to be treated thus: If the subject reports his judgment, while the
moveable rod has not reached the line of the stationary rods, the error is negative (minus). If
the judgment is after the judgment is after the stationary rod the error is counted as
positive.

b. Reproach series: Keep the moveable rod close to the front side (subject side) and give
judgment of the distance. Instruct the subject as follows: “Keep on observing the moveable
rod in front of your eyes. With the signal “start”. I will move the middle rod slowly away from
 you. You have to ask me to stop when you see the moveable rod come to the line with
stationary rods. Five trials are to be given in this series also.

Scoring

If the judgment is given before the moveable rod reaches the stationary rod the difference will
be the negative score and if the judgment is given after the moveable rod crosses the line of the
stationary rod, it is scored as positive.

Precautions:

1. The variable rod has to be moved gradually without jerky movement.

2. The approaching and reproaching series must be administered alternatively.

Analysis of Data: Compare the magnitude of errors under the two experimental conditions-
Approach series and reproach series.

Results and Discussion

Table 1

Results of the participant

Ascending Descending
Trial Distance (in cm) Distance (in cm)
1 -0.3 -9.3
2 +1.2 +0.7
3 +0.7 -1.8
4 +0.4 +0.6
5 +0.2 +0.3
Mean +0.24 -2.36

Table 2

Over-estimation and Under-estimation

 Conditions Over-estimation Under-estimation
Ascending 4 1
Descending 3 2

As can be seen from the above data, the participant has an average error distance of 0.24 cm
in the Ascending series and an average error distance of -2.36 cm in the descending series. The
number of overestimations is also higher in the ascending series than in the descending series. As we
can see, there is a difference in the error of depth perception in both series which goes against the
hypothesis.

Table 3

Errors in the group

Subject Approaching (mean) Reproaching (mean)

AM 0.06 -0.04
VV -0.06 0.52
AK -1.38 -4.74
GK -0.8 0.22
AM 0.33 0.51
NBJ 0.46 -2.02
PNM 0.38 0.55
DDR 0.44 0.08
BD -0.12 1.08
AK 0.44 0.08
JL -0.76 0.14
AR 0.36 0.1
NV 0.3 0.6
BS -0.24 0.14

Mean -0.04214285714 -0.1985714286

S.D 0.5508458246 1.479796541

As can be seen above, the subject has mean distance errors that are more than the mean of the
entire group which indicates that their depth perception is not better than that of the group.

Discussion

The subject’s scores go against the hypothesis suggesting that there may have been some
external influence on their depth perception or that the hypothesis needs to be rejected. They also
have a depth perception that is worse than the average of the group.

Introspective report:

I found the experiment a little tiring for the eyes. My eyes could not fully focus on the alignment, but
I tried my best. I found the experiment interesting. The experimenter was well informed about the
procedure which caused absolutely no hassle during experimentation.