STUDIES - Bartlett (1932)

Question 1

Introduction

Answer 1

• One of the first studies to prove existence of schemas and how cultural schemas influence memory

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

• Investigate how memory of a story is affected by previous knowledge
• He wanted to see if cultural background and unfamiliarity with a text would lead to distortion of memory when story was recalled

Question 3

Procedure

Answer 3

SAMPLE

• British participants unfamiliar with American native story called “The War of Ghosts”

METHOD
Independent measures with random allocation to 2 groups:

• G1 (repeated reproduction): Participants heard story and were told to reproduce it over various testing occasions
• G2 (serial reproduction): Participants heard store and were told to really it and repeat it to another participant

VARIABLES

• IV: Method of reproduction
• DV: How story was recalled

Question 4

Results

Answer 4

• No significant difference between the way the groups recalled the story, as both conditions changed it (distortion)
• Overall remembered main themes in store but changed elements to match schemas and expectations
• Story remained coherent (structurally) but changed

HAD 3 PATTERNS OF DISTORTION:

1) Assimilation

• Story became more consistent with participants’ own cultural expectations (details unconsciously changed to fit norms of UK culture)
• More conventional: Details that could be assimilated retained

2) Levelling

• Story became shorter with each retelling as they omitted information seen as unimportant

3) Sharpening

• Changed order of story to make sense of it after changing cultural aspects

Question 5

Findings

Answer 5

• People remember stories in terms of what makes sense to them
• Memory is subject to distortions because of schemas
• Proved that schemas are complex unconscious knowledge structures (major contribution to psychology)

Question 6

Strengths

Answer 6

• High ecological validity: Several applications and many real-life situations

Question 7

Limitations

Answer 7

• Uncontrolled methodology
• Not specific enough:
  1) Procedure: Participants did not receive standardised instructions (e.g. recall time)
  2) Low replicability: Hard to replicate, leading to low reliability (many researchers tried but couldn’t)
• Low internal validity: IV didn’t affect DV and no CV to observe effect
• Method of recalling story did not affect the results
• Culture affected how story was recalled, which should be the IV, but that’d mean that it would be quasi-experiment as culture cannot be manipulated (no cause-and-effect)
• No control group: Should have Native Americans recall the story to verify that culture was factor that resulted in distortion