The idea that memory is not recorded passively, suggesting that memories are stored in bits
We extract the underlying meaning but don’t necessarily recall info entirely.
Perception is an active construction of what we think we seeing using prior knowledge
Current experiences of the person influence how they remember events.
‘Effort after meaning’ – people using reconstructions to make sense of what they already know (memories stored in bits) – what they remember is distorted because use of imaginative reconstruction.
Schema is a mental structure which holds past experiences & influences memories e.g Schema on criminals (pocket of information).
Rationalism is when you alter something so it makes sense to us. We twist some memories to fit others so they make sense.
We use confabulation to make up certain parts of memories to fill in the gaps.
| Strengths | Weaknesses |
| Brewer & treyens – tested memory for objects in office by allowing 30 ppts to look for 35 seconds. They recalled office related objects but not objects like picnic basket – schema on office objects led to wrong recall.
Bartlett – tested ppt with unfamiliar north American war of the ghost story. After 6 sessions, recall became distorted & shortened. (canoe for boat) – ppts filled In gaps by confabulation Application – can show how eyewitnesses use schemas, confabulation to make mistakes when giving eye witness statements – this can help by stopping single witness evidence prosecutions. |
Yullie & cutshall – found after 5 months, witnesses remembered the account of a real life robbery – showing complex real life incidents can be recalled without being reconstructed.
Bartlett – didn’t use a standardized procedure/ instructions & low control on how participants heard the stories – hard to replicate for consistencies. Bartlett – low task V as ppts had to learn an old folk’s tale which was written in an unusual style – lack of mundane realism and doesn’t reflect situations of memory. Flash bulb memories – remember distinct memories like Brewers experiment with skull in the office – suggesting we don’t have schema’s on unique objects but have stronger memory trace. |
Case Study:
Mainly produce qualitative data, some methods such as observations, interviews & questionnaires. However still gather quantitative such as brain scans, closed questions.
Reconstructing case history of a single ppt or small group of individuals.
A detailed & in-depth study, where a variety of methods are used to gather data (interviews, questionnaires & observations)
Usually applied to unusual or rare examples of behaviour, may provide new insights into psychological functions and help question/supports psychological theory leading to new research.
Purpose of using different methods to gather data is to triangulate & compare findings and common themes. This can reinforce sources.
Often longitudinal allowing change to be measured over time, following individual life span & used to understand behaviours to change or understand.
Cog Psychologists interest in Brain damage, brain mapping and looking at parts controlling memory, area of damage & extent of damage. Ability & loss of functions differ, intervention, strategies& rehabilitation can be learnt. Brain scans.
Much of Qual data on brain damage comes from ppt disclosure about themselves. Important life events, feelings, personality.
| Strengths | Weaknesses |
| Allows psychologists to study rare and unusual behaviour where other research methods unsuitable – allow psychologists to analyse behaviour which may change over life span in a more ethical way.
Allows in detailed, in depth data to be collected as it permits study over a long period of time (longitudinal) – can find out affects or changes in behaviour of humans after brain overtime with valid patterns of development. Constructs detailed ‘case history’ of the client and can often involve number of different research methods – one set of data can validate findings/themes of another (triangulation) Uses mostly qualitative data which produces rich and in-depth data of behaviour & traits through open questions. Also quant data via close questions – data combines objective but also rich in depth data giving better insights. |
Extremely hard to control all variables in a person’s life meaning extraneous variables are likely which would affect the results – cannot establish a cause and effect relationship.
Data gathered mostly in qual form, based on experimenters own views and opinions. Some researchers may become emotionally involved with their ppts – leads to subjectivity meaning harder to replicate findings as based off a researcher’s opinion. Case studies normally occur on an individual or a small group of ppts with rare or unusual behaviour – we cannot say it might happen to every person with brain damage as this behaviour is unique. Cannot generalise to whole population. |