Knowt
Schema Theory
Introduction
Humans don’t just respond to stimuli. They also process information
Generally speaking, there are two types of information processing: bottom-up and top-down.
Bottom-up processing: occurs when the cognitive process is data-driven
Perception is not biased by prior knowledge/expectations
Pure information that is based on reality as it is.
Top-down processing: occurs when prior knowledge or expectations (schemas) alter how information is received and processed.
Mental representations: mental images that represent our external reality
Schemas are mental representations derived from prior experience and knowledge
Schema Theory
A combination of ideas about how our mind organizes information and how this can affect cognitions (memory and thinking) and behavior.
The theory views knowledge as an elaborate network of abstract mental structures that represent the understanding we have of the world.
Knowledge of the world is organized and categorized in clusters called schemas.
Schemas are used to:
organize knowledge
assist recall
guide behavior
predict likely happenings
help us make sense of current experiences
Schemas are stable and resistant to change
This allows continuity in how we process information and how we act.
Schemas are unconscious and automatic
This is why they might affect behavior
Schemas also allow us to make sense of the environments very well
Rumerhalt and Normal (1983)
They argued that schemas represent knowledge, including semantic meanings and procedures.
Types of schemas:
Social Schemas: mental representations of various groups of people
Stereotypes are stored here
Scripts: Schemas about sequences of events
not about objects but about how events are carried out (e.g., shower routine)
Self Schemas: Representations about ourselves
Schema and Memory
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Aim: To see whether the schema people had about a place would affect the way they remembered the space
Participants: 30 university students
Procedure:
Each participant was taken into an office and left alone for 35 seconds
The experimenter said this was his office and they should wait there while he checked if the lab space was ready
The participants were then taken to another room and were asked to write down everything they remembered about the office.
Findings: Participants often remembered things that would be found in a typical office (e.g., cabinets, books, pens and pencils, coffee cups, windows, and curtains), but these items weren’t actually in the office they visited.
Only 8/30 students recalled the skull. A few recalled the coffee pot, and 1/30 recalled the picnic basket.
Baggett (1975)
Aim: to see how schemas are present in memory for explicit and implicit information in picture stories.
Procedure: Participants were shown a series of 3 pictures that told a story
#1: a person with long hair entering a barber shop
#2: same person sitting in a barber’s chair
#3: person leaving shop with shorter hair
In a later test participants were shown a 4th picture of the barber cutting the person’s hair
Findings: People were good at remembering that the 4th picture was not a part of the original sequence. However, if the test happened 1 week later, they claimed they had seen the 4th picture in the original sequence.
Conclusion: This study shows how we include information derived from our schemata into our memory.
Anderson and Pitchert (1978)
Aim: To see how schemata influence memory encoding and retrieval.
Participants: 96 college students
Proccedure: Participants were given 2 min. to read a story (about two boys skipping school) that had a total of 73 ideas.
They were given 1 point per idea they remembered from the perspective they were given (house buyer or burglar)
After writing it down they did a distraction task for 12 min.
They were then told to write it down again either as the same perspective as before or the opposite perspective. (4 groups)
Findings: The participants that stayed with their original schema mainly remembered details relevant to their perspective.
The people who switched schemas (groups 3 and 4) remembered more information about their switched perspective. The recalled an additional 7% of the now important information. However, participants in groups 1 and 2 recalled 3% of the still irrelevant information.
Conclusion: This shows that the processes of encoding and retrieval are different, and that participants encoded more information than they could retrieve.
Selection of schema
What schemas are selected depend on factors like: accesibility and priming.
Accesibility: how easily a schema comes to mind. This is determined by personal experience and expertise.
Can be used as a cognitive shortcut and allows for the most common explanation to be chosen for new information
Priming: When you are exposed to a stimulus that activates a schema so the ambiguous information is processed by that schema
Modification of a schema
They can be modified through assimilation and accommodation
Assimilation: Taking new information into a pre-exisiting schema
Accomodation: Process that involves changing or altering our schemas because of new information
Desiquilibrium: When a new piece of information does not fit into an existing schema, unbalancing our understanding of the world
Bartlett (1932)
Believed that LTM are not fixed or unchangeable but are consistently being adjusted as our schemas evolve.
Evaluating the Schemas Theory
Strengths
Schema theory has substantial empirical support
There are a lot of studies that support the theory (Bartlett, Caramazza, Anderson and Pitchert, Brewer and Treyens, and Bagette)
Caramazza (2009)
Used and fmri and found that from the visual cortex, information about living and non-living things is shuttled into different parts of the brain (even in blind participants).
This suggests that our brain automatically sorts information and classifies it in the same way the schema theory predicts.
Schema theory is testable
Anderson and Pitchert
Schema theory can be applied across cultures
Schema theory can be applied to explain behavior and cognitions
Limitations
Reductionist/mechanist view of mental processes
Schemas cannot be observed
Schema Theory
Introduction
Humans don’t just respond to stimuli. They also process information
Generally speaking, there are two types of information processing: bottom-up and top-down.
Bottom-up processing: occurs when the cognitive process is data-driven
Perception is not biased by prior knowledge/expectations
Pure information that is based on reality as it is.
Top-down processing: occurs when prior knowledge or expectations (schemas) alter how information is received and processed.
Mental representations: mental images that represent our external reality
Schemas are mental representations derived from prior experience and knowledge
Schema Theory
A combination of ideas about how our mind organizes information and how this can affect cognitions (memory and thinking) and behavior.
The theory views knowledge as an elaborate network of abstract mental structures that represent the understanding we have of the world.
Knowledge of the world is organized and categorized in clusters called schemas.
Schemas are used to:
organize knowledge
assist recall
guide behavior
predict likely happenings
help us make sense of current experiences
Schemas are stable and resistant to change
This allows continuity in how we process information and how we act.
Schemas are unconscious and automatic
This is why they might affect behavior
Schemas also allow us to make sense of the environments very well
Rumerhalt and Normal (1983)
They argued that schemas represent knowledge, including semantic meanings and procedures.
Types of schemas:
Social Schemas: mental representations of various groups of people
Stereotypes are stored here
Scripts: Schemas about sequences of events
not about objects but about how events are carried out (e.g., shower routine)
Self Schemas: Representations about ourselves
Schema and Memory
Brewer and Treyens (1981)
Aim: To see whether the schema people had about a place would affect the way they remembered the space
Participants: 30 university students
Procedure:
Each participant was taken into an office and left alone for 35 seconds
The experimenter said this was his office and they should wait there while he checked if the lab space was ready
The participants were then taken to another room and were asked to write down everything they remembered about the office.
Findings: Participants often remembered things that would be found in a typical office (e.g., cabinets, books, pens and pencils, coffee cups, windows, and curtains), but these items weren’t actually in the office they visited.
Only 8/30 students recalled the skull. A few recalled the coffee pot, and 1/30 recalled the picnic basket.
Baggett (1975)
Aim: to see how schemas are present in memory for explicit and implicit information in picture stories.
Procedure: Participants were shown a series of 3 pictures that told a story
#1: a person with long hair entering a barber shop
#2: same person sitting in a barber’s chair
#3: person leaving shop with shorter hair
In a later test participants were shown a 4th picture of the barber cutting the person’s hair
Findings: People were good at remembering that the 4th picture was not a part of the original sequence. However, if the test happened 1 week later, they claimed they had seen the 4th picture in the original sequence.
Conclusion: This study shows how we include information derived from our schemata into our memory.
Anderson and Pitchert (1978)
Aim: To see how schemata influence memory encoding and retrieval.
Participants: 96 college students
Proccedure: Participants were given 2 min. to read a story (about two boys skipping school) that had a total of 73 ideas.
They were given 1 point per idea they remembered from the perspective they were given (house buyer or burglar)
After writing it down they did a distraction task for 12 min.
They were then told to write it down again either as the same perspective as before or the opposite perspective. (4 groups)
Findings: The participants that stayed with their original schema mainly remembered details relevant to their perspective.
The people who switched schemas (groups 3 and 4) remembered more information about their switched perspective. The recalled an additional 7% of the now important information. However, participants in groups 1 and 2 recalled 3% of the still irrelevant information.
Conclusion: This shows that the processes of encoding and retrieval are different, and that participants encoded more information than they could retrieve.
Selection of schema
What schemas are selected depend on factors like: accesibility and priming.
Accesibility: how easily a schema comes to mind. This is determined by personal experience and expertise.
Can be used as a cognitive shortcut and allows for the most common explanation to be chosen for new information
Priming: When you are exposed to a stimulus that activates a schema so the ambiguous information is processed by that schema
Modification of a schema
They can be modified through assimilation and accommodation
Assimilation: Taking new information into a pre-exisiting schema
Accomodation: Process that involves changing or altering our schemas because of new information
Desiquilibrium: When a new piece of information does not fit into an existing schema, unbalancing our understanding of the world
Bartlett (1932)
Believed that LTM are not fixed or unchangeable but are consistently being adjusted as our schemas evolve.
Evaluating the Schemas Theory
Strengths
Schema theory has substantial empirical support
There are a lot of studies that support the theory (Bartlett, Caramazza, Anderson and Pitchert, Brewer and Treyens, and Bagette)
Caramazza (2009)
Used and fmri and found that from the visual cortex, information about living and non-living things is shuttled into different parts of the brain (even in blind participants).
This suggests that our brain automatically sorts information and classifies it in the same way the schema theory predicts.
Schema theory is testable
Anderson and Pitchert
Schema theory can be applied across cultures
Schema theory can be applied to explain behavior and cognitions
Limitations
Reductionist/mechanist view of mental processes
Schemas cannot be observed
