(3) Unit 1 - Cognitive Assumption Three - Schemas

What do cognitive psychologists suggest about schemas?

That they help us to understand and interpret our world through predictions.

How can schemas be described?

As knowledge packets of information. They are how our mind stores information in the long-term memory - when you think about any category of knowledge, your schema for that subject will be activated. These are changeable filing cabinets or stored information that may contain types of sports, memories of sports and anything else you think about sport, for example.

How can schemas change?

With experience. If you learn a new fact (and rehearse it) then your schema will adapt. This experience could be based on personal interactions, meaning that they are not necessarily factual.

Schemas come in a variety of different forms. What is a popular idea in schemas?

The concept of scripts - how we expect certain situations to unfold. Most people have very similar scripts for social situations.

What research can be used to suggest that schemas shape our memory?

Bartlett’s (1932) ‘War of the Ghosts’.

What did Bartlett’s research entail?

Participants being told a story and asked to recall it after varying amounts of time.

What did Bartlett find?

Out of the 330 words, participants remembered 180 on average, but as the story was culturally unfamiliar, participants misremembered certain aspects as their schemas were activated. For example, ‘hunting seals’ was replaced with ‘fishing’, ‘canoes’ became ‘boats’, place names were left out and ‘warriors’ became ‘soldiers’.

How can this assumption be linked to the formation of romantic relationships?

Using the halo effect.

What does the halo effect suggest?

That if our schema for an individual contains positive impressions, e.g. the person is friendly, then we are more likely to believe they have other positive characteristics as well, e.g. they are also intelligent.

What research illustrates the impact of the halo effect?

Thorndike (1920) first wrote about this cognitive bias when assessing the effect the commanding officers’ evaluation of one quality of their soldiers had on their overall view of other qualities. Qualities evaluated included leadership, physical appearance, intelligence, loyalty and dependability. If they were rated highly in one of these categories, quite often they were rated highly in other characteristics.