A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

the immediate recall was not the same for either delayed recall or percentage of
learning retained. Table 5.4 below presents the ranking of participants for
immediate recall, delayed recall and the percentage of knowledge retained from
the original training sessions. Participants were listed according to their
performance in descending order. Participants who scored highest in immediate
recall assessments (see C1, P3, C2 and C3) also ranked highest in delayed
recall assessments although the individual participants changed position with
the exception of C1. Participants who recalled the lower amount of information
on immediate recall tasks (see C7, C8 and C9) also recalled the lower amount in
delayed recall tasks and participants scoring in-between these scores also had
the same level of recall in delayed recall (see C4, C5 and C6).
Table 5.4
Ranking and performance of learning by participants for immediate and delayed recall
Participant ranking and Participant ranking and Participant ranking and
percentage correct for percentage correct for percentage of items retained
immediate recall
delayed recall
from immediate recall
C1 99 C1 82 C1 83
P3 90 C3 66 C3 80
C2 89 C2 59 C5 80
C3 83 P3 53 C9 74
C4 67 C4 45 C7 71
C5 62 C5 50 C6 70
C6 59 C6 41 C4 67
C7 48 C7 35 C2 66
C8 48 C8 32 C8 66
C9 24 C9 18 P3 49
C10 16
C11 15
However, a different pattern emerged following the analysis of the percentage of
information retained from the immediate recall tasks. C1 and C3 who achieved
high scores for both immediate and delayed recall tasks retained the most
information from initial training sessions. Interestingly C9 and C7 who were
142