reconstructive memory Flashcards
principles of reconstructive memory - P1, A01
memory is not accurate, we store memories and recall them later on by reconstructing these memories
memory is an active process where we store fragments of information and when it needs to be recalled we build these fragments into a meaningful whole
the result of this is that some elements are missing, distorted and memory is not a completely accurate record of what happened
strength of reconstructive memory - supporting evidence from bartlett P1, A03
one strength of reconstructive memory is that the theory is based on research which is more realistic than a lot of memory research
before Bartlett’s work psychologists investigated memory using artificial materials to be learned such as nonsense syllables - RIZ and KUY
these are ‘artificial’ because we rarely use out memories to deal with such things
this means that the social origins of memory are obscured in such artificial research
but Bartlett’s findings and the theory based on them are more relevant to real-life memory processes
COUNTER ARGUMENT TO strength of reconstructive memory - supporting evidence from bartlett P1, A03
However, Bartlett’s research did not use rigorously controlled methods and lack objectivity
for example instructions were not standardised, so the participants ‘experiences’ of the procedure were inconsistent, making it hard to compare reproductions
therefore, this means the evidence underlying reconstructive memory lacks reliability and validity
war of the ghosts study - P2, A01
Bartlett was able to demonstrate reconstructive memory in a famous study using the War of the Ghosts story
He showed British participants the War of the Ghosts story - an unfamiliar folk tale
he showed participants the story on the left and then asked them to reproduce it 15 minutes later
he then showed the new version to another person and asked them to recall it a short time later and repeated this with further participants - serial reproduction
he found that the story was transformed over time
e.g. it became shorter through omissions - unfamiliar details were left out
phrases were altered to match the participants own culture e.g., canoe was often changed to boat
these reconstructions were not random - they had the effect of making the story more conventional, coherent and meaningful to the participants
Bartlett explained reconstructive memory in terms of schema theory
weakness of reconstructive memory - P2, A03
One weakness of reconstructive memory is that it is wrong to suggest that all memories are inaccurate or affected by schemas
other studies have shown that memory can be very accurate
for example, in situations that are personally important or distinctive, we do remember considerable and accurate details
there are examples of this in the war of the ghosts - participants often recalled the phrase ‘something black came out of his mouth’ because it was quite unusual
therefore, this shows that people may not always actively reconstruct memories or when they do these reconstructions can be highly accurate and relatively unaffected by expectations or beliefs
schema - P3, A01
a schema is a mental structure in memory a ‘package’ containing all stored knowledge of aspects of the world
for example, a group of people writing down ten words relative to bank robbery - these would represent their schema as there would be similarities and differences in the words written down
when we come across new knowledge or experiences the relevant schema is activated
we assume that the situation matches the knowledge already contained in the schema making some ‘guesses’ about what the situation is probably like
strength of reconstructive memory, application of schema to eye witness testimony - P3, A03
one strength of schema theory is that it can be used to explain problems with eyewitness testimony
eyewitness testimony is often used in court trials to give an accurate picture of what actually happened when a crime was committed
for example, an eyewitness might swear on oath that they had seen a particular person at the crime scene whereas later evidence challenged this
Bartlett’s research showed that memory can be affected by our schemas, which include expectations of what ‘should’ happen
research on eyewitness testimony has subsequently shown that people do no always recall what they see or hear accurately
therefore, the consequence of this is that no convictions are now solely based on eyewitness testimony as it is not trustworthy which is an important application of Bartlett’s research
schema and memory
schemas influence memory in two main ways:
1. what you encode / store
2. what you retrieve
new knowledge that conflicts with an existing schema could easily fail to be encoded in the first place
it just does not fit in with what you expect, so you do not notice it or it does not ‘register’ in memory
Later when one attempts to recall the memory, you might recall only those elements that fit in with the relevant schema
other elements that do not fit are either forgotten altogether or are recalled in a distorted form
