Reconstructive memory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:34, 30 April 2021

Revision as of 19:59, 1 June 2021

Line 8:

683–725. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press</ref>

In this manner, the various features of the experience must be joined together to form a coherent representation of the episode.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{Cite journal|last1=Hemmer|first1=Pernille|last2=Steyvers|first2=Mark|date=2009|title=A Bayesian Account of Reconstructive Memory|journal=Topics in Cognitive Science|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=189–202|doi=10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01010.x|pmid=25164805|issn=1756-8765}}</ref> If this binding process fails, it can result in [[memory error]]s. The complexity required for reconstructing some episodes is quite demanding and can result in incorrect or incomplete recall.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Torres-Trejo|first1=Frine|last2=Cansino|first2=Selene|date=2016-06-30|title=The Effects of the Amount of Information on Episodic Memory Binding|journal=Advances in Cognitive Psychology|volume=12|issue=2|pages=79–87|doi=10.5709/acp-0188-z|pmid=27512526|pmc=4975570|issn=1895-1171|doi-access=free}}</ref> This complexity leaves individuals susceptible to phenomena such as the [[misinformation effect]] across subsequent recollections.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kiat|first1=John E.|last2=Belli|first2=Robert F.|date=2017-05-01|title=An exploratory high-density EEG investigation of the misinformation effect: Attentional and recollective differences between true and false perceptual memories|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074742717300606|journal=Neurobiology of Learning and Memory|language=en|volume=141|pages=199–208|doi=10.1016/j.nlm.2017.04.007|issn=1074-7427|pmid=28442391|s2cid=4421445}}</ref> By employing reconstructive processes, individuals supplement other aspects of available personal knowledge and schema into the gaps found in episodic memory in order to provide a fuller and more coherent version, albeit one that is often distorted.

Many errors can occur when attempting to retrieve a specific episode. First, the retrieval cues used to initiate the search for a specific episode may be too similar to other experiential memories and the retrieval process may fail if the individual is unable to form a specific description of the unique characteristics of the given memory they would like to retrieve.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Burgess | first1 = PW | last2 = Shallice | first2 = T | year = 1996 | title = Confabulation and the control of recollection | journal = Memory | volume = 4 | issue = 4| pages = 359–411 | doi = 10.1080/096582196388906 | pmid = 8817460 }}</ref> When there is little available distinctive information for a given episode there will be more overlap across multiple episodes, leading the individual to recall only the general similarities common to these memories. Ultimately proper recall for a desired target memory fails due to the interference of non-target memories that are activated because of their similarity.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

Line 18:

===Schema===

[[Schema (psychology)|Schema]] are generally defined as mental information networks that represent some aspect of collected world knowledge. Frederic Bartlett was one of the first psychologists to propose Schematic theory, suggesting that the individual's understanding of the world is influenced by elaborate neural networks that organize abstract information and concepts.<ref name=Bartlett>{{cite web|url=http://iscte.pt/~fgvs/Bartlett,%20Experiments.pdf|title="Frederick Bartlett", Some Experiments on the Reproduction of Folk-Stories, March 30, 1920}}</ref> Schema are fairly consistent and become strongly internalized in the individual through [[socialization]], which in turn alters the recall of [[episodic memory]]. Schema is understood to be central to reconstruction, used to confabulate, and fill in gaps to provide a plausible narrative. Bartlett also showed that schema can be tied to cultural and social norms.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last1=Bartlett|first1=Sir Frederic Charles|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WG5ZcHGTrm4C&pg=PR9#v=onepage|title=Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology|last2=Bartlett|first2=Frederic C.|last3=Bartlett|first3=Frederic Charles|date=1995-06-30|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-48356-8|language=en}}</ref>

==== Jean Piaget's theory of schema ====

Line 28:

==== Frederic Bartlett's experiments ====

[[Frederic Bartlett]] originally tested his idea of the reconstructive nature of recall by presenting a group of participants with foreign folk tales (his most famous being "War of the Ghosts"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dlvalenc/PSY307/LINKS/GHOSTWAR.HTM|title="War of the Ghosts", March 5, 2012, }}</ref>) with which they had no previous experience. After presenting the story, he tested their ability to recall and summarize the stories at various points after the presentation to newer generations of participants. His findings showed that the participants could provide a simple summary but had difficulty recalling the story accurately, with the participants' own account generally being shorter and manipulated in such a way that aspects of the original story that were unfamiliar or conflicting to the participants' own schematic knowledge were removed or altered in a way to fit into more personally relevant versions.<ref name=Bartlett /> For instance, allusions made to magic and Native American mysticism that were in the original version were omitted as they failed to fit into the average Westerner schematic network. Besides, after several recounts of the story had been made by successive generations of participants, certain aspects of the recalled tale were embellished so they were more consistent with the participants' cultural and historical viewpoint compared to the original text (e.g. Emphasis placed on one of the characters desire to return to care for his dependent elderly mother). These findings lead Bartlett to conclude that recall is predominately a ''reconstructive'' rather than ''reproductive'' process.<ref name=":0" />

James J. Gibson built off of the work that Bartlett originally laid down, suggesting that the degree of change found in a reproduction of an episodic memory depends on how that memory is later perceived.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Gibson | first1 = J.J. | year = 1929 | title = The Reproduction of Visually Perceived Forms | URLurl = http://wexler.free.fr/library/files/gibson%20(1929)%20the%20reproduction%20of%20visually%20perceived%20forms.pdf | journal = Journal of Experimental Psychology | volume = 12 | issue = 1| pages = 1–39 | doi=10.1037/h0072470}}</ref> This concept was later tested by Carmichael, Hogan, and Walter (1932) who exposed a group of participants to a series of simple figures and provided different words to describe each images. For example, all participants were exposed to an image of two circles attached by a single line, where some of the participants were told it was a barbell and the rest were told it was a pair of reading glasses. The experiment revealed that when the participants were later tasked with replicating the images, they tended to add features to their own reproduction that more closely resembled the word they were [[Priming (psychology)|primed]] with.

===Confirmation bias===

Line 65:

====Leading questions====

Often during eyewitness testimonies, the witness is interrogated about their particular view of an incident and often the interrogator will use [[leading question]]s to direct and control the type of response that is elicited by the witness.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Loftus | first1 = E.F. | year = 1975 | title = Leading Questions and the Eyewitness Report | URLurl = http://www.someya-net.com/01-Tsuyaku/Reading/Loftus75.pdf | journal = Cognitive Psychology | volume = 7 | issue = 4| pages = 560–572 | DOIdoi = 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90023-7 | s2cid = 16731808 }}</ref> This phenomenon occurs when the response a person gives can be persuaded by the way a question is worded. For example, a person could be posed a question in two different forms:

* "What was the approximate height of the robber?" which would lead the respondent to estimate the height according to their original perceptions. They could alternatively be asked:

* "How short was the robber?" which would persuade the respondent to recall that the robber was actually shorter than they had originally perceived.

Line 80:

====Priming====

Priming refers to an increased sensitivity to certain stimuli due to prior experience.<ref name="APA Dictionary of Psychology"/> Priming is believed to occur outside of conscious awareness, which makes it different from memory that relies on the direct retrieval of information.<ref>Cherry, K. (2009, March 26). Priming - What Is Priming. Psychology - Complete Guide to Psychology for Students, Educators & Enthusiasts.</ref> Priming can influence reconstructive memory because it can interfere with retrieval cues. Psychologist [[Elizabeth Loftus]] presented many papers concerning the effects of proactive interference on the recall of eyewitness events. Interference involving priming was established in her classic [[Reconstruction of automobile destruction|study]] with John Palmer in 1974.<ref>{{cite journal | URLurl = https://webfiles.uci.edu/eloftus/LoftusPalmer74.pdf | last = Loftus | first = EF |author2=Palmer JC | author-link = Elizabeth Loftus | year = 1974 | title = Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction : An Example of the Interaction Between Language and Memory | journal = Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior | volume = 13 | issue = 5 | pages = 585–9 | DOIdoi = 10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3 }}</ref> Loftus and Palmer recruited 150 participants and showed each of them a film of a traffic accident. After, they had the participants fill out a questionnaire concerning the video's details. The participants were split into three groups:

* Group A contained 50 participants that were asked: "About how fast were the cars going when they '''hit''' each other?”