Flashcards
Psy Cognitive LT6 - Reconstructive Memory - Bartlett, 1932 - Evaluation
Flashcards do conjunto (11)
- 1Supporting evidence from BartlettThere is supporting evidence of reconstruction & stereotyping from Bartlett's (1932) WOTG Chinese whisper style experiment where participants did change the story to match existing stereotypes. WOTG demonstrated that pps did rationalise (alter) the story to match existing schemas. It also showed that pps did confabulate as they added details to fill in gaps they do not understand.
- 2Supporting evidence from CarliThere is supporting evidence from Carli (1999) who demonstrates that memories become more stereotyped following reproduction. Carli showed that pps asked to reproduce a story about a rape began to describe the rapist as threatening before the event supporting reconstructive memory.
- 3Internal validityThere are problems with the internal validity of the supporting WOTG study. The Native American folk story made no sense to the pps, therefore it might be argued that they altered the story to make it make sense because they were being asked to retell the story. There could have also been demand characteristics for the study, where the pps anticipated what the intended answer was and tried to give it.
- 4ReliabilityBartlett would claim his theory is based on reliable findings. Although some may criticise the mundane realism of his 'stories', Bartlett repeated his reproduction experiments (recalling information at increasing time intervals) using 8 different stories on different pps and found the same memory errors in terms of shortening, transformation, etc. Further, many recent and well controlled experiments have consistently shown the reconstructive effect of schemas on memory, e.g. Bransford & Johnson.
- 5Contributions/applications to societyReconstructive memory has contributions/applications to society. It highlights how eye witness testimony may not be reliable as eyewitnesses may reconstruct their memories of an event to make it make sense. For example they may confabulate, adding details that were not there and thus can make witness recall inaccurate. Loftus & Palmer (1975) proved that eye witness memory can be manipulated by the use of leading questions. However, Steyvers & Hammer (2012) demonstrate that in a real context without manipulated material EWT can be very accurate and therefore reliable.
- 6Scientific credibilityThe WOTG study on which the theory is based lacks scientific credibility. There was a lack of control in the procedures when the story was read or recalled meaning the data could be flawed. Pps were free to discuss the objects and stories presented to them. The findings were qualitative and subjective as he simply described the nature of recalled memory.
- 7Reductionist/simplistic - describes what happensThe model has been criticised for being overly simplistic. It does not explain how memory is reconstructive but just describes what happens; unlike the MSM it does not tell us how memories are stored
- 8Reductionist/simplistic - acquirement of schemasSchema is seen as a vague concept and theory offers no explanation as to how schemas are acquired in the first place
- 9Reductionist/simplistic - distinctiveness effectThe ideas cannot explain how often unusual information that cannot easily be incorporated into existing schemas is well remembered (distinctiveness effect)
- 10Reductionist/simplistic - model of LTMUnlike the MSM reconstructive memory is a model of LTM only, therefore it fails to give an explanation of how our STMs work; it does not account for the transference between short term and long term memory
- 11Reductionist/simplistic - Studying memory experimentallyBy being reductionist and focusing on LTM only, Bartlett makes it easier to study memory experimentally
Informações
- Descrição
- A level Psychology FlashCards sobre Psy Cognitive LT6 - Reconstructive Memory - Bartlett, 1932 - Evaluation, criado por Megan Goodwin em 06-01-2019.
- Criado por
- Megan Goodwin
- Visualizações
- 1
- Avaliação