reconstructive memory study (Bartlett)

Question 1

who was the researcher for the memory: reconstructive memory study?

Answer 1

Bartlett

Question 2

what was the aim of Bartlett’s reconstructive memory study?

Answer 2

to investigate how memory is reconstructed when pp’s are asked to recall something over a period of weeks and months

Question 3

what was the IV in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 3

time between hearing the story and recalling it (days, months etc)

Question 4

what was the DV in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 4

accuracy of recall of the story

Question 5

what was the research method in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 5

lab experiment

Question 6

what was the experimental design in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 6

independent groups

Question 7

what was the sample in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 7

20 Cambridge students

Question 8

what was the CV in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 8

N/A

Question 9

what were the results/findings in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 9

the story was shortened (from 330 words to 180 words)
some words were changed (e.g canoe to boat)
the recalled version soon became fixed, with slight variations

Question 10

what was the conclusion(s) of the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 10

we do not remember the whole story- we remember the meaning and interpret it using our social and cultural expectations

Question 11

what was the first opposing evidence ‘Point’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 11

the ‘War of the Ghosts’ story was unusual

Question 12

what was the first opposing evidence ‘Evidence’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 12

the story was unusual as it mentioned things like a ‘war party’ and ‘Egulac’ which the pp’s most likely hadn’t encountered in real life

Question 13

what was the first opposing evidence ‘Explanation’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 13

as a result, the procedure in Bartlett’s study tells us very little about accuracy of our everyday memory

Question 14

what was the first opposing evidence ‘Link’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 14

therefore, our memory for events we see in everyday life may be more accurate than Bartlett suggested

Question 15

what was the second opposing evidence ‘Point’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 15

Bartlett’s study was not well controlled

Question 16

what was the second opposing evidence ‘Evidence’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 16

the study was conducted with no set standard about where and how people recalled the information. pp’s were also not told that accuracy was important

Question 17

what was the second opposing evidence ‘Explanation’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 17

as there were no set standards, we cannot replicate the study to see if the results are reliable

Question 18

what was the second opposing evidence ‘Link’ in the reconstructive memory study?

Answer 18

as a result of this, Bartlett’s findings may not be valid and he might have underestimated how accurate memory can be