Schemas

• What is schema theory?

  Schemas are mental representations that are derived from prior experience and knowledge. They organise our knowledge, beliefs and expectations and influence memory processes in encoding, storage and retrieval.
• What is a script schema?


  Schemas that provide information about the sequence of events that occur in an unchanging order (e.g. visiting a dentist)
• What is a self-schema?


  Self-schemas organise information you have about yourself, (e.g. strengths and weaknesses)
• What is a social schema?


  Social schemas are stereotypes that represent information about groups of people
• What is a person schema?


  Person schemas organise information about individual people
• What is a role schema?


  Role schemas provide information about the proper behaviours in given situations
• What is a trait schema?


  Trait schemas organise information about the innate characteristics people have
• What is an object schema?


  Object schemas are about inanimate things and how they work
• What did Piaget (1926) do?


  Proposed ideas of assimilation and accommodation
• What is assimilation?


  Assimilation is using an existing schema to deal with a new object or event.
• What is accommodation?


  Accommodation is when an existing schema is changed or developed when presented with new information that the schema cannot adequately explain.
• What is the driving force of assimilation and accommodation?


  equilibration (balance)
• What was the aim of Bartlett (1932)'s study?


  To investigate how memory of an unfamiliar story is affected by previous knowledge.
• What was Bartlett (1932)'s procedure?


  He used a convenience sample of students in Cambridge university, and told them a Native American legend called The War of the Ghosts. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, one being repeated reproduction ( participants were asked to reproduce the story after they listened to it and then repeatedly do so over a period of days, weeks, months or years), or serial reproduction (participants had to recall the story and repeat it to another person).
• What was Bartlett (1932)'s findings?


  He found that participants changed the story in many ways, it was subject to processes of reconstruction such as confabulation, sharpening, levelling, or the transportation of details from one story to another
• What were Bartlett (1932)'s conclusions?


  He concluded that memory is reconstructive as people use familiar schemas to recognise unfamiliar material. Bartlett was the first to conclude that cultural schema influences remembering
• What is Confabulation?


  A distortion whereby schemas fill in gaps in memory
• What is Sharpening?


  A distortion whereby a schema will create an explanation for something that is not synonymous with the schema (rationalising it)
• What is levelling?


  A distortion whereby information is shortened and information that does not fit within the schema is discarded
• What are some strengths of Bartlett (1932)'s study


  Bartlett's study started the possibility of studying cognitive processes scientifically

  His research supported schema theory and the theory of reconstructive memory

  the experiment has ecological validity as remembering and repeating is an everyday activity His research helps to explain many real-life situations
• What are some weaknesses of bartlett (1932)'s study


  Exact methodology is unclear

  His research was not specific enough, so difficult to replicate (e.g. intervals were not standardised) His experiment had very few controls

  His findings have low reliability as when other researchers have tried to replicate it, they were unable to replicate the findings.
• What was Roediger (2014)'s study?


  Roediger et al. found that serial reproduction leads to more forgetting and more distortion than repeated reproduction.
• What was the aim of Brewer and Treyens (1981)'s study?


  Brewer and Treyens aimed to investigate the role of schema in the encoding and retrieval of memory.
• What was Brewer and Treyens (1981)'s procedure?


  They used a sample of 86 university level psychology students. Participants were seated in a room made to look like an office- consisting of objects typical of offices such as calendars, paper, etc, and some objects that would not be expected in an office- such as a skull or toys. Some objects were not present in the office that would have been expected- such as books. After 35 seconds, the participants were called into another room and asked what they remembered from the 'office'.. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions:

  The recall condition- participants had to write a description for as many objects as they could remember 'from the office'. they were asked to 'write a description as if you were describing the room for someone who had never seen it'. Then they were given a verbal recognition test where they were given a booklet containing a list of objects- 61/131 of them in the room, and 70/131 not. they had to rate each item for how sure they were that it was in the room from 1-6 (6 being completely sure and 1 not at all).

  The drawing condition- participants were given an outline of the room and were asked to draw as many items as they remembered.

  The verbal recognition condition- participants were read a list of objects and were simply asked if they were in the room or not.

  They were also given a questionnaire asking if the participants thought that they would be asked if they remembered the objects in the room. 93% said no.
• What were Brewer and Treyens (1981)'s findings?


  When a participant was asked to recall through writing or drawing, they remembered items congruent with their schema of an office ('expected items'). In the drawing and writing conditions, participants changed the nature of objects to fit their schema- (the trapezium table was changed to a square, for example). Items that were incongruent with their schema of an office were not often recalled. When participants did the verbal recognition tasks, they were more likely to recognise incongruent items, and frequently identified objects that were congruent with their schemas that were not actually in the room.
• What did Brewer and Treyens (1981) conclude?


  Brewer and Treyens concluded that schema played a role in both encoding and recall of objects in the office.
• What are some weaknesses with Brewer and Treyens (1981)'s study?


  The schema of the students prior to the experiment were not verifies, which leads to low internal validity and bidirectional ambiguity.

  In the written recall, many participants recognised many objects that were congruent with their schemas to be present in the room. It has not been explained why some participants did this, and others did not.
• What are some strengths of Brewer and Treyens (1981) study?


  It could be applied to other areas of research

  They found that retrieval of memory is closely linked to schema.
• What was Anderson (1976)'s aim?


  Anderson's aim was to investigate how personal experiences and schemas influence interpretations of stories.
• What was Anderson (1976)'s procedure?


  He used a sample of sixty participants- thirty female students studying music education, and thirty male students studying weight-lifting. Two passages of around 150 words were given to the participants, one being the prison/wresting passage and the other being the Card/music passage.Both passages can be interpreted in different ways. Each participant was asked ten MCQs after each passage. There were two correct answers out of the four options, one for each different interpretation. Participants also completed autobiographical questionnaires in which they gave details about themselves that may relate to the passages. They were also given a debriefing questionnaire asking if they were aware of any other interpretations of the texts.
• What was Anderson (1976)'s findings?


  The weightlifting students got more questions right in the prison/wresting passage than the cards/music passage (64%) compared to (29%). The Music education students got more questions right in the cards/music passage than the prison/wrestling passage (71%) compared to (28%). He found that the weightlifting students were more likely to view the passages as wrestling/cards, and the music education students were more likely to view the passages as prison/music. 62% were never aware of a different interpretation, and 20% found out that there were different interpretations when completing the questionaries. He also found that the autobiographical data of the participants (their background) influenced their interpretations, through analysis of the autobiographical questionnaires.
• What were Anderson (1976)'s conclusions?


  He concluded that 'personal history, knowledge and belief influence the interpretations that they will give to prose passages', and that his findings 'support unequivocally the claim that high-level schema provide the interpretative framework for comprehending discourse', meaning that schemas affect the interpretation of stories.
• What are some strengths of Anderson (1976)'s study?


  May lead to teaching improvements, as greater emphasis may be placed on developing relevant schemas to comprehend new information rather than on basic comprehension.
• What are some weaknesses of Anderson (1976)'s study?


  It is unclear if schemas work in the same way for each participant, as while some recognised that there were other interpretations, others did not. It may also be possible that other factors affect how strongly schemas affect interpretations.

  Gender may have been an extraneous variable within the study, leading to low internal validity.
• What is the mnemonic for mental processes?

  Please Please Save My Little Annoying Cat It Learned To Jump

  Perception

  Problem solving

  Sensation

  Memory

  Language

  Attention

  Creativity

  Imagination

  Learning

  Thinking

  Judging
• What is the mnemonic for evaluating research?


  I SCREAM

  Internal validity

  Sample

  Culture

  Reliability

  External validity

  Alternative evidence

  Methodology
• What is the mnemonic for evaluating theories?


  TEACUP

  Testable

  Empirical evidence

  Applications

  Concepts

  Unbiased

  Predictable