Cognitive: Reconstructive Memory (Bartlett, 1932) Flashcards
What is meant by Reconstructive Memory?
The idea that we alter information we have stored when we recall it, based on prior expectations/knowledge.
What are Schemas?
Schemas are parcels of stored knowledge or a mental representation of information about a specific event or object. Every schemas has fixed and variable information, for example, the schema for going to a restaurant…
- Fixed knowledge = knowing you were going to be waited on or choosing from the menu.
- Variable knowledge = how much the meal costs or what’s on the menu.
What do we do with new information we’ve paid attention to?
- Assimilate new information - changes our schemas to fit what we have learned.
- Accomodate new information - change our memories to keep our schemas intact and unchanged.
How does Bartlett explain how we accomodate new information?
- Levelling - removing or downplaying details from the memory.
- Sharpening - adding or exaggerating details.
What is Confabulation?
When gaps in memory are unconsciously filled with fabricated, misinterpreted, or distorted information - when someone confabulates, they’re confusing things they’ve imagined with real memories.
What is the role of schemas? Why might they lead to confabulation?
Memory makes use of schemas to organise things. When we recall an event, our schemas tell us what is supposed to happen - so schemas might fill in the gaps in our memory (confabulation) and put pressure on our mind to remember things in a way that fits in with the schema, removing or changing details. For example…
- Might remember Japanese diners eating with chopsticks (because that’s part of your schema for Japanese meals) whereas in reality the Japanese use their fingers to eat sushi.
What idea did Bartlett come up with?
Reconstructive Memory.
What was the Bartlett’s study?
- 20 P’s read “The War of the Ghosts” twice.
- Bartlett asked them to recall the story after several minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years (longest being 6 1/2 years) - repeated reproduction to test effect of time lapse on recall.
- Then compared how recalled versions differed from original.
What were the results of Bartlett’s study?
Participants…
- Shortened story when they reproduced it - 330 to 180 words (shortest reproduction after the longest gap, 2 years).
- Confabulated details, changing unfamiliar parts of the story for familiar ideas in line with their schemas - canoes and paddles became bots and oars, hunting seals became fishing.
- Rationalised story, coming up with explanations for baffling parts of the story - P’s missed out ‘ghosts’ and described the battle between Native American Tribes.
What Experimental Design was Bartlett’s study?
Repeated-Measures.
What does Repeted Reproduction mean?
A P recalls information at increasing time intervals (e.g. after 10 mins, a week, a month, etc).
What is the ELA for Reconstructive Memory?
Evidence:
- Bartlett (para 1)
- Loftus (para 2)
Limitations:
- Incomplete/holistic theory (para 3)
Applications:
- Validation Therapy (para 3)
What are the pros and cons of Bartlett’s study?
- Bartlett’s results provide evidence for reconstructive memory and the effect of schemas.
- P’s shortened the story from 330 to 180 words.
- P’s confabulated detials, changing unfamiliar parts of the story to fit their schemas, e.g. hunting for seals turned to fishing.
- P’s rationalised the story, coming up with explanations for random parts. ✅
However:
- Bartlett didn’t use many experimental controls and had no standardised procedure.
- e.g. he bumped into one student in the street 2 years later and asked them to reproduce the story there and then.
- This reduces the reliability of the evidence, making the theory less reliable. ❌
- e.g. he bumped into one student in the street 2 years later and asked them to reproduce the story there and then.
What was Loftus and Palmer’s study?
- Showed students clips of real car crashes and set them a questionnaire.
- Critical question asking about speed of the cars - some students read a critical with an intense verb (“How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?”) but others read a less intense verb like “hit”.
- Also asked if there was any broken glass in the clip (when there had been none).
What were the results of Loftus and Palmer’s study?
- “Smashed” group recalled higher speed (40.8mph on average) than P’s exposed to “hit” (34mph).
-
12% of control group recalled glass, 14% of “hit” group recalled glass, but 32% of “Smashed” group recalled glass.
- So we incorpoate new info we learned after the incident.
- Sharpened memory - added details of glass to fit schemas.
- So we incorpoate new info we learned after the incident.
