Learning objective To understand schema theory.

To understand schema theory. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zgyNl6LuWM

Learning Outcomes Homework – collect magazine pictures so far (5 minutes) Listen & Discuss – the schema theory

To understand schema theory.

To understand schema theory. Someone’s knowledge and understanding is from experience. Therefore… People’s memory for a story is affected by previous knowledge (schemas) and the extent to which memory is reconstructive. This has been proven in particular with cultural background and the using of words to affect ‘memory’.

To understand schema theory. Schema is like the building blocks of life, which start from inside the womb Everything we can do and have learned is like a brick in the wall. Learn things in order, the bricks create a good wall. Miss stages of learning, the wall becomes unstable. Psychologists believe that life and our emotions are built by schema – miss a part the persons ability to react can become unstable.

To understand schema theory. Human beings are information processors and mental processes guide behavior. If the brick wall isn’t built well, they cannot process situations so well.

To understand schema theory. What may affect a baby’s development in the womb? Organs Blood flow Brain development Placental effects

To understand schema theory. What affects a baby in the first few weeks of life? Responding to sound Crying Feeding Being wet / cold / warm / smells

To understand schema theory. What affects a child in the first few weeks of life? Sounds Smells Talking Singing Toys Others Cuddles Smiles How words are said What they see

To understand schema theory. By the time someone is a teenager, their emotions have been built. At this stage intervention, such as therapy, may be needed What do you think may happen for a child’s schema who did not have a good time as a: Baby in the womb New born baby Toddler Child

We are always trying to process the info around us. Our perceptions are usually based on what we already know. What do you think this is?

A schema is a mental representation of knowledge in the brain. We have schemas for basically everything!!!! Right now in your head, picture a model. But does this one?

Schema Theory They provide guidelines for interpreting information when trying to make sense of the world. They create expectations on what will happen in certain situations. Whether at religious school or at a party, you expect different behaviors. What if someone threw you a curve ball by doing something you do not expect.

Schema Theory Can even explain…. Stereotyping An overgeneralised belief about a group of people.

What may they be like towards others? Schema Theory So what impact might there be if someone cannot perceive situations well? What may they be like towards others?

Do schemas affect the way we perceive race?

Schemas and Memory Reconstruction Our memories are not video and audio recordings. They are constructed by ‘cognitive processes’. How do you think schemas can effect our memories?

Darley and Gross (1983) Carried out a laboratory experiment on schema theory in the social world. Often called the Hannah Study Participants saw 2 videos of a girl.

Darley and Gross (1983) In video 1, girl was playing in a poor environment. In video 2, girl was playing in a rich environment. Then they saw a video of the girl taking what looked to be an intelligence test and answering the questions inconsistently.

Darley and Gross (1983) When participants were asked to judge the future of the girls, they all said the “rich” girl would do well and the “poor” girl would do less well. On average they judges the “rich” Hannah as having a A grade academic level, and “poor” Hannah at a D grade level.

Darley and Gross (1983) The study demonstrates that participants probably used pre- stored schemas of what it means to be poor and rich. They then interpreted the rest of the scene based on these schemas.

Before we start our next piece of evidence, list all the titles that are used in science Aim Equipment Methods / Procedure Results Conclusion Psychology Hypothesis Aim Participants Methods / Procedure Ethics Results Conclusion Evaluation

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction Aim: To test their hypothesis that the language used in eyewitness testimony can alter memory. To investigate whether the use of leading questions would affect recall in a situation where participants were asked to estimate speed. This is a situation that could happen when people appear in court as eyewitnesses.

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction Participants: 45 Students Procedure: The student participants saw videos of traffic accidents and had to answer questions about the accident.

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction The participants were asked to estimate speed of the cars based on one of the following critical question: “About how fast were the cars going when they smashed?” “About how fast were the cars going when they hit?” “About how fast were the cars going when they collided?” “About how fast were the cars going when they bumped?” “About how fast were the cars going when they contacted?” What is happening each time?

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction Results: The mean estimates of speed were highest in the “smashed condition” (40.8 mph). Lowest in the “contacted group” (31.8 mph).

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction The results indicated that memory is not reliable and can be manipulated by using specific words. Where does our understanding of words come from? The schema!

Before we start our next piece of evidence, remember this? Science Aim Equipment Methods / Procedure Results Conclusion Psychology Hypothesis Aim Participants Methods / Procedure Ethics Results Conclusion Evaluation

We now need to describe what each is Psychology Hypothesis Aim Participants Methods / Procedure Ethics Results Conclusion Evaluation In the back of your books, explain each one the best that you can.

Research has shown that perception and memory and thinking are also influenced by cultural factors. What do you think that means?

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” This is our first experiment we need to learn. New title: Bartlett (1932) War of the Ghosts

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” We will learn about the: Aim Procedure Participants Results Conclusion Evaluation

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Aim: To investigate whether people’s memory for a story is affected by previous knowledge (schemas) and the extent to which memory is reconstructive.

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Procedure: Bartlett asked British participants to listen to a story. After a while he asked them to reproduced (repeat) the story. He asked them again and again (over a period of months and years) which he called serial reproduction.

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” The story was an unfamiliar Native American legend called “The War of Ghosts”.

The War of Ghosts One night two young men from Egulac went down to the river to hunt seals and while they were there it became foggy and calm. Then they heard war-cries, and they thought: "Maybe this is a war-party". They escaped to the shore, and hid behind a log. Now canoes came up, and they heard the noise of paddles, and saw one canoe coming up to them. There were five men in the canoe, and they said: "What do you think? We wish to take you along. We are going up the river to make war on the people." One of the young men said,"I have no arrows." "Arrows are in the canoe," they said. "I will not go along. I might be killed. My relatives do not know where I have gone. But you," he said, turning to the other, "may go with them." So one of the young men went, but the other returned home. And the warriors went on up the river to a town on the other side of Kalama. The people came down to the water and they began to fight, and many were killed. But presently the young man heard one of the warriors say, "Quick, let us go home: that Indian has been hit." Now he thought: "Oh, they are ghosts." He did not feel sick, but they said he had been shot. So the canoes went back to Egulac and the young man went ashore to his house and made a fire. And he told everybody and said: "Behold I accompanied the ghosts, and we went to fight. Many of our fellows were killed, and many of those who attacked us were killed. They said I was hit, and I did not feel sick." He told it all, and then he became quiet. When the sun rose he fell down. Something black came out of his mouth. His face became contorted. The people jumped up and cried. He was dead.

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Results: The participants remembered the main idea of the story (the gist) but they changed unfamiliar elements to make sense of the story by using terms more familiar to their own cultural expectations.

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” The story remained a coherent whole although it was changed. It became noticeably shorter after each reproduction.

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Conclusion Bartlett concluded that remembering is an active process. Memories are not copies of experience but rather “reconstructions” (made up to fill in what we do not remember or understand)

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Evaluation: (good and bad points) The results of the study confirm schema theory (and reconstructive memory). But is was performed in a laboratory and might lack ecological validity (real life)

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Participants did not receive standardised instructions. Some of the memory distortions may be due to simple guessing

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” http://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=BGsYDhIhVcg

Bartlett (1932)

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” Aim A statement of what your study is being carried out to find. The aim of this study is to examine whether…or…. Method Contains how you conducted your experiment: How did you select your participants? What are you participant demographics? (Number of male/female, age range etc). Extension: What were your independent and dependent variables? Did you use independent groups or repeated measures design? Results Contains what you found, including descriptive statistics: mean/median/mode and range plus a graph of your results. Conclusion What can we infer from our results? Do our results support our original aim, or refute it? Evaluation What are the strengths/weaknesses of your chosen study? If you were to conduct the study again what might you change?

Bartlett (1932) - Aim Aim: To investigate how information changes with each reproduction and to find out why the information changes.

Bartlett (1932) - Method Procedure: Folk tale called ‘The war of the ghost’. Deliberately strange, with ideas and names that were unfamiliar to the participants. Participants completed a serial reproduction task and repeated reproduction task.

Bartlett (1932) – Key definitions Serial reproduction: a task where a piece of information is passed from one participant to the next in a chain or series. Differences between each version are measured. Repeated reproduction: a task where the participant is given a story or picture to remember. They then recall it several times, after time delays. Differences between each version are measured.

Bartlett - Results Findings: Very few participants recalled the story accurately. Bartlett found changes to the following elements of the story: Form Details Simplification Addition The serial reproduction showed the same changes as the repeated reproductions. They also showed clearly how one individual’s interpretation affected all the others in the chain.

Bartlett - Conclusion Conclusion: Unfamiliar material changes when it is recalled. It becomes shorter, simpler and more stereotyped. This may be due to the effect of schemas on memory,

Bartlett (1932) “The War of Ghosts” You are now going to recreate your own example of Bartlett’s experiment. Find a story. Have two groups of participants: serial production and repeated production. Can you video record the effects? What is the outcome?