5. Reconstructive memory Flashcards
(28 cards)
What did Bartlett theorise
- culture, experiences, beliefs impact memory
What is reconstructive memory theory?
- Active construction based on a person’s schema rather than a passive, 100% accurate record
What is a schema?
- A structured framework / blueprint that helps organise and interpret info
- Used to help us understand world around us, forming the structural components of human memory
- Represents some aspect of the world (event, concept, relationship)
- Unique to an individual and their previous knowledge, interpretations, expectations, motivations
Describe reconstructive memory and when and why memories become distorted
- NOT like a recording where we mentally play back events and perfectly recall them as they did occur
- Memory distorted in encoding phase
- Change over time according to our schema and during recall - make more sense to us
What is the process of distortion for memories?
- Memories have gaps in them and when recalled our schemas influence these gaps
- We automatically, unconsciously fill in these memory gaps with info from our schemas (eg: stereotypes, social / cultural expectations) as memory now fits better with what know
- Producing distorted memories which we accept as real
What do we tend to remember about events?
- Meaning of events rather than specific details
Aim (WoTG)
- Investigate how memory reconstructed when people asked to recall something repeatedly over a period of weeks/ months
- Use an unfamiliar story from a diff. culture to see how cultural expectations affect memory and can alter info
Method
- 20 participants (students from Cambridge Uni) showed a story (WoTG) and asked to reproduce it 15 minutes later
2 reproduction methods for WoTG
- Serial reproduction: one person tells story to another person and shows them the new version of the story, chain continues
- Repeated reproduction: single participant had to recall story multiple times over a period (weeks, months)
Culture
- Bartlett’s story probably felt hard to remember because it was from a different, unfamiliar culture (Native American)
- Test if memory could be reconstructed using cultural norms
Results
- participants found difficult to remember bits of story such as spirits and changed other bits
- story overall was shortened
- the alterations often fit into their own beliefs/ experiences/ culture (eg: canoe to boat)
Conclusion
- If given something unfamiliar to remember, alter info - memory is influenced by beliefs and what we are used to
- People remember fragments of memories and reconstruct them based on what they expect to happen/ cultural expectations
What can occur to memories due to reconstruction?
- Omission
- Rationalisation
- Transformation
- Familiarisation
- Confabulation
Omission
Leaving out information that you did not understand
Rationalisation
Making the illogical become logical to your own beliefs
Transformation
Changing ideas into conventional and cultural concepts
Familiarisation
When unfamiliar details are changed to align with our own schemas
Confabulation
Making up bits to fill in a memory to make sense of it
What are the 4 aspects of RMT
- Reconstruction
- Memory inaccurate
- Social and cultural influences
- Effort after meaning
Reconstruction
- Every time memory is recalled - reconstructed from small, recorded info fragments
- pieced together slightly differently every time memory is recalled as demonstrated in WoTG study
Memory is inaccurate
- Memories don’t work like a recording (ie: passive process) - INSTEAD active process as stored fragments/ info snapshots with memories missing lots of info can be inaccurate
Social and cultural influences
- Used cultural schemas to reconstruct memories (eg: WoTG study canoe = boat)
Effort after meaning
- Recall meaning of event
- Then make an effort to piece the story together from fragments
Supporting evidence (Loftus and Palmer) -
(1974): conducted lab experiments to illustrate RM and how influenced by questioning techniques used by police
- 45 participants shown films of traffic accidents and asked to recall what seen (independent groups design)
- Asked: ‘How fast were the cars travelling when they HIT/ SMASHED into each other?’
- Participants asked with ‘hit’ on average gave a slower speed compared to ‘smash’ despite watching same video