Reconstructive memory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:10, 17 September 2023

Revision as of 18:17, 26 October 2023

Line 22:

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

[[File: Jean Piaget in Ann Arbor.png|thumb|right|Jean Piaget influenced the study of reconstructive memory with his theory of schema.]]

[[Piaget's theory#Assimilation and accommodation|Piaget's theory]] proposed an alternative understanding of schema based on the two concepts: '''assimilation''' and '''accommodation'''. Piaget defined assimilation as the process of making sense of the novel and unfamiliar information by using previously learned information. To assimilate, Piaget defined a second cognitive process that served to integrate new information into memory by altering preexisting schematic networks to fit novel concepts, what he referred to as accommodation.<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://internal.psychology.illinois.edu/~broberts/Block,+1982.pdf|author=Jack Block|title=Assimilation, Accommodation, and the Dynamics of Personality Development|year=1982|doi=10.2307/1128971|jstor=1128971|journal=Child Development|volume=53|pages=281–295|number=2}}{{Dead link|date=October 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> For Piaget, these two processes, accommodation, and assimilation, are mutually reliant on one another and are vital requirements for people to form basic conceptual networks around world knowledge and to add onto these structures by utilizing preexisting learning to understand new information, respectively.

According to Piaget, schematic knowledge organizes features information in such a way that more similar features are grouped so that when activated during recall the more strongly related aspects of memory will be more likely to activate together. An extension of this theory, Piaget proposed that the schematic frameworks that are more frequently activated will become more strongly consolidated and thus quicker and more efficient to activate later.<ref>Auger, W.F. & Rich, S.J. (2006.) Curriculum Theory and Methods: Perspectives on Learning and Teaching. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.</ref>

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|access-date=March 6, 2012|archive-date=October 8, 2001|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20011008213440/http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dlvalenc/PSY307/LINKS/GHOSTWAR.HTM|url-status=dead}}</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 | url = 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.

Line 62:

====Cross-race effect====

Reconstructing the face of another race requires the use of schemas that may not be as developed and refined as those of the same race.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Pezdek | first1 = K. | last2 = Blandon-Gitlin | first2 = I. | last3 = Moore | first3 = C. | year = 2003 | title = Children's Face Recognition Memory: More Evidence for the Cross-Race Effect | url = http://infantlab.fiu.edu/Articles/Pedzke%20et%20al%202003.pdf | journal = Journal of Applied Psychology | volume = 88 | issue = 4 | pages = 760–763 | doi = 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.760 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.365.6517 | pmid = 12940414 | access-date = 2012-03-20 | archive-date = 2010-06-15 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100615001905/http://infantlab.fiu.edu/Articles/Pedzke%20et%20al%202003.pdf | url-status = dead }}</ref> The [[cross-race effect]] is the tendency that people have to distinguish among other of their race than of other races. Although the exact cause of the effect is unknown, two main theories are supported. The perceptual expertise hypothesis postulates that because most people are raised and are more likely to associate with others of the same race, they develop an expertise in identifying the faces of that race. The other main theory is the in-group advantage. It has been shown in the lab that people are better at discriminating the emotions of in-group members than those of out-groups.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Elfenbein | first1 = H. A. | last2 = Ambady | first2 = N. | year = 2003 | title = When familiarity breeds accuracy: Cultural exposure and facial emotion recognition | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 85 | issue = 2| pages = 276–290 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.276| pmid = 12916570 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.200.1256 | s2cid = 16511650 }}</ref>

====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 | url = http://www.someya-net.com/01-Tsuyaku/Reading/Loftus75.pdf | journal = Cognitive Psychology | volume = 7 | issue = 4 | pages = 560–572 | doi = 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90023-7 | s2cid = 16731808 | access-date = 2012-03-22 | archive-date = 2020-06-19 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20200619230254/http://www.someya-net.com/01-Tsuyaku/Reading/Loftus75.pdf | url-status = dead }}</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.