Li Chun Ho IB Psychology Higher Evaluate schema theory with reference to research studies In this response I will evaluate the

schema theory by Bartlett (1932) on cognitive processes. The schema theory is a cognitively structured frame representing a persons knowledge about objects and people based on past experience. We attempt to make sense of things using our schemas. I will support the schema theory with the studies of Anderson & Pichert (1977) and Martin & Halvorson (1983). Anderson & Pichert showed the perspectives of individuals towards objects affect their capacity to learn and recall them. Martin & Halvorson showed distorted memories affect schemas. I will then criticize the theory with explanations including the study of Gauld & Stephen (1967). A schema is a mental representation built from past experience that helps us organize and interpret new information. It allows us to make sense of the incoming data. They help assist recall, guide our behavior and predict the likely occurrences. As a result, it simplifies reality because it enables us to take short-cuts in interpreting large amount of data. As a result, it contributes to the formation of stereotyping and generalization. An example of such is the study of Bartlett (1932). Participants in the experiment was asked to read an excerpt from, The War of the Ghosts, fables that were unusual to western culture. Participants then proceed with either serial or repeated reproduction. In serial reproduction, the first participant rewrites the excerpt from memory onto paper to another participant and so on. In repeated reproduction, the same participant reproduces 6-7 times on paper. In the findings, the length significantly decreased from the word count of 329 to an average of 180 words. This suggests participants removed information they deemed meaningless. Furthermore, words that were obscure and less used were replaced by modern words. For example, hunting seals were changed to fishing, canoes to boats. Culture therefore also has an influence. It shows memory is reconstructive, where people make sense of the information from past experiences. To evaluate, the study can suggest schema has much scientific evidence and although is affected by culture, is largely universal. This aids our understanding in the formation of stereotyping, learning and memory. Moreover, the variable control in the experiment allowed researchers to establish a credible cause-and-effect relationship on how memory processes are affected by schemas. However, the studys ecological validity is questioned for it was conducted under artificial conditions in a laboratory setting. The study of Anderson and Pichert (1977) supports the schema theory. They investigated whether schema processing influences the encoding and retrieval of information. Participants read a passage and were told either to pretend to be homebuyers or burglars. Researchers found the participants were likely to find more information supporting their roles. For example, those assigned to be burglars were more likely to learn of 3 bikes parked in the garage. There were two trials, some of participants had same roles while others had different roles. It was found those with the same role were able to remember 10% more points about their role. Martin & Halvorson (1983) conducted a study showing how information can be distorted by preexisting gender schemas. Participants were children under the age of 8, who were shown pictures of males or females engaged in activities that were either consistent or inconsistent with their gender roles. They were then asked to recall them. It was found children showed distorted memories of

Li Chun Ho IB Psychology Higher Evaluate schema theory with reference to research studies role-inconsistent pictures. For example, a girl sawing wood was remembered as a boy sawing wood. It suggests young children tend to be more affected by schemas and stereotypes. However, there are also criticisms against the schema model. There is no real biological evidence for the existence of schemas, but it is rather a cognitive belief that the mind is mechanistic. In addition, as it is difficult to exactly define what a schema is, there are problems of interpretation. Cohen (1993) contended that the whole idea of a schema is too vague to be useful. Rumelhart (1980) identified four different analogies of what a schema is, but failed to actually define the term. In addition, Gauld & Stephen (1967) replicated Bartletts study in a better-controlled environment by emphasizing the importance of accurate recall. They would stress the importance of accurate recall. As a result, over half of the errors made in Bartletts studies were eliminated. This suggests Bartletts study was not very controlled and may lack external validity when compared to findings from other studies, such as Gauld & Stephens.