Cognitive Approach - Cognitive Processing - Schema Theory

Question 1

Schema Theory

Answer 1

• Schema: mental representation of complex knowledge stored in the brain
• We have schemas for
  
  • objects (frames)
  • events (scripts)
  • places
  • situations
  • people (social schemas)
• Schemas
  
  • organise information
  • increase efficiency of information processing
  • influence behaviour
  • enhance memory

Question 2

Schema & Memory

Answer 2

• Schema processing affects memory at all stages
• Encoding
  
  • A particular information will be selected for encoding if:
    
    • a relevant schema exists
    • the schema has been activated
    • the importance of incoming information with repsects to the schema
  • The information selected is further reduced by abstraction
    
    • encodes the meaning but not the format
  • A schema further distorts the incoming information
    
    • the meaning encoded is an interpretation of the incoming information
    • based on the perceiver’s activated schema
  • As the meaning is encoded it will be intergrated into a schema
• Storage
• Retrieval

Question 3

Schema Theory - Evaluation

Answer 3

Testable:

• Schema theory is testable
  
  • Many studies prove it

Applications:

• Schema theory has been applied to help us understand how memory works.
• It also helps us to understand memory distortion.
• Schema theory has also been applied to abnormal psychology (therapy for depression and anxiety), relationships (theories of mate selection) and health psychology (health campaigns to change unhealthy behaviours).
• It is a robust theory that has many applications across many fields of psychology.

Construct validity:

• Cohen (1993) argued that the concept of schema is too vague and hypothetical to be useful.
• Schema cannot be observed.

Unbiased:

• Schema theory is applied across cultures.
• There is no apparent bias in the research, although most of the early research was done in the West.

Predictive validity:

• The theory helps to predict behaviour. We can predict, for example, what types of information will be best recalled when given a list of words.
• Trends, such as omitting information that is not of high relevance to the individual, are commonly seen in individuals recalling a news story.
• However, we cannot predict exactly what an individual will recall.

Question 4

Brewer & Treyens (1981)

Answer 4

Aim:
- Investigate whether people’s memory for objects in a
room (an office) is influenced by existing schemas about
what to expect in an office.

Pps:
- 86 university psychology students

Procedure:
- Pps seated in a room that was made to look like an
office
- the room had objects typical, not typical and ommited
of what an office should have
- Pps were asked to wait in the office while the
researcher “checked to make sure that the previous pps
had completed the experiment”
- they did not know the experiment had started
- only one chair was available
- 35 secs later the pps went to another room
- they were asked to remember what was in the office
- 93% said they did not expect to be asked that
- 30 pps carried out written and verbal recall
- asked to write down the location, shape, size and
colour of the objects
- asked to rate each item from a list for how sure they
were that the object was in the room
- 29 pps carried out drawing recall
- given an outline of the room and asked to draw in the
objects
- 27 pps carried out verbal recognition
- they were read a list of objects and asked if they were
in the room

Results:
- Writing a paragraph or drawing -> more likely to
remember items confruent with their schema
- items incongruent with schema -> not often recalled
- From a list -> more likely to identify incongruent items
- higher rate of identifyinf objects which were schema
congruent but ont in the room
- Drawing and recall -> tended to change the nature of the objects to match their schema

Question 5

Bransford & Johnson (1972)

Answer 5

Aim:
- Investigate how availability of prior knowledge affects comprehension and memory of linguistic material

Experiment 1
Pps:
- 50 pps divided in 5 groups

Procedure:
- Pps heard the passage
- 2 min delay
- rated how comprehensible they found the passage
- 7 min to write down what they recalled
- Conditions:
- only heard the passage once
- heard the passage twice
- presented an appropriate picture after they had heard
the passage
- presented a partially relevant picture before hearing
the passage
- presented the appropriate picture before hearing the
passage
Results:
- No context (passage once) 3.6/14 units
- No context (passage twice) 3.8/14 units
- Context after 3.6/14 units
- Partial context 4.0/14 units
- Context before 8.0/14 units

Experiment 2:
Pps:
- 52 pps divided into 3 groups

Procedure:
- Same as experiment 1
- Conditions:
- heard the passage
- heard the passage then informed it was about washing
- first informed it was about washing, then heard the
passage

Results:

• Topic after + no topics recalled 3.0 units
• Topic before recalled 6.0 units