Research Publication Title

Memory Differences Between GIF and Static Images

Major

Psychology

Faculty Mentor

Eric rindal

Keywords

memory, working memory, old-new recognition, source monitoring

Abstract

Past research has shown that using animated images or videos with auditory stimuli can improve memory relative to static images with auditory stimuli (Arguel & Jamet 2009). Previous studies have not included Graphic Interchange Format (GIF) images. Thus, it is not clear if this type of animated image would also show that benefit. This study sought to determine if GIF images still produced better memory performance than static images in isolation without accompanying audio. For this study, one hundred GIFs of mundane tasks (e.g. brushing hair, cutting food) were used. A static image was created by taking the GIF and using a single frame that most obviously displayed the task. The final pool of images was determined based on a pilot study that demonstrated that participants described each GIF and static image similarly to ensure each version conveyed similar information. The presentation form for each image was counterbalanced to vary presentation order and presentation format so that each image was presented equally as either a GIF or static image across participants. Participants completed the study through an online questionnaire. In the study, participants viewed fifty images; twenty-five static images and twenty-five GIF images in a randomized order and each lasting ten seconds. Following the image viewing, participants completed a letter-span task to measure their working memory and working memory capacity. Participants were given a letter span task where they viewed sequences of letters, one at a time, and were asked to recall those letters in order. Participants working memory was assessed by the longest sequence that they were able to recall. After the working memory task, participants were presented with a final questionnaire. The final questionnaire was a source monitoring test which consisted of all one hundred images from the image pool. The images were presented side-by-side in the static and GIF forms. Participants were asked how they were presented each image and would answer with “static,” “GIF,” or “I was not presented this image.” Participants' source monitoring accuracy was measured by their accuracy in selecting the correct presentation format or identifying it as not previously seen. Old-new recognition was based on their accuracy collapsing across static and GIF formats as having been previously seen or not. Results showed that the participant’s memory performance was dependent on the presentation format.

Streaming Media

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

Memory Differences Between GIF and Static Images

Past research has shown that using animated images or videos with auditory stimuli can improve memory relative to static images with auditory stimuli (Arguel & Jamet 2009). Previous studies have not included Graphic Interchange Format (GIF) images. Thus, it is not clear if this type of animated image would also show that benefit. This study sought to determine if GIF images still produced better memory performance than static images in isolation without accompanying audio. For this study, one hundred GIFs of mundane tasks (e.g. brushing hair, cutting food) were used. A static image was created by taking the GIF and using a single frame that most obviously displayed the task. The final pool of images was determined based on a pilot study that demonstrated that participants described each GIF and static image similarly to ensure each version conveyed similar information. The presentation form for each image was counterbalanced to vary presentation order and presentation format so that each image was presented equally as either a GIF or static image across participants. Participants completed the study through an online questionnaire. In the study, participants viewed fifty images; twenty-five static images and twenty-five GIF images in a randomized order and each lasting ten seconds. Following the image viewing, participants completed a letter-span task to measure their working memory and working memory capacity. Participants were given a letter span task where they viewed sequences of letters, one at a time, and were asked to recall those letters in order. Participants working memory was assessed by the longest sequence that they were able to recall. After the working memory task, participants were presented with a final questionnaire. The final questionnaire was a source monitoring test which consisted of all one hundred images from the image pool. The images were presented side-by-side in the static and GIF forms. Participants were asked how they were presented each image and would answer with “static,” “GIF,” or “I was not presented this image.” Participants' source monitoring accuracy was measured by their accuracy in selecting the correct presentation format or identifying it as not previously seen. Old-new recognition was based on their accuracy collapsing across static and GIF formats as having been previously seen or not. Results showed that the participant’s memory performance was dependent on the presentation format.

blog comments powered by Disqus