Effect of Pre-Existing Schemas on Memory Recall

Effect of Pre-Existing Schemas on Memory RecallAasimah NabeebocusAbstractPrevious research has shown that everyday computer storage fails in world sufficient to crawfish and represent data dead-on(prenominal)ly, measured using a conscription task and recognition task. Researchers admit explained this in terms of a schema theory. That is individuals refuse and represent information based on their pre-existing schemas. However much research conducted in this field, is egressdated, therefore this current story aimed to shed light on this by using the same procedure as Results indicate that while there was a real residual in the representation of the clock mingled with the copy and retrospection check out. No significant differences were found in the choice of recall by participants in the memory or copy condition. The matter partly supports some previous research, and the implications of this recouping suggest potential real life applications.Historically researchers have highlighted the importance of everyday memory. But contrary to this popular discover emerging research have real shown that everyday memory lacks accuracy and lead to biases in perception of everyday objects and situations. Nickerson and Adams (1982) investigated this idea whereby participants were instructed to recall and draw two sides of a U.S. penny. They found that recall was inaccurate and relatively poor, and that the features identified by the participants did non match correctly to the unitarys on the coin. Morris (1988) who investigated this further found that British students who were asked to get a line and recall the right coin, only a small (15 %) percentage of students were able to recall the appearance of the coin. This indicates that exactly looking at an object constantly does not necessarily mean that we pay attention and that the memory formed is correctly retained.Cohen (1989) proposes a theory that best explains this notion of failure in accurate me mory recall. Schema theory suggests that our capacity to recall information is based on existing knowledge and prior experiences. In addition, it claims that our day-to-day memory consists of a sit of schemas, or knowledge structures through which we form our knowledge of objects, situations, events, or actions t learnt from previous experience.A study that lends firm support to this theory was examined by Allport and Postman (1947). In their study participants were shown a photograph of a black male being menaced by a white male on the subway. When participants were questioned later about the offender, participants were more than(prenominal) likely to recall and identify the black man as the offender. It appears therefore that limiting ourselves to what we already know can biased ones view on how they whitethorn perceived and recall a situation or person.Furthermore, a study by Williams and Richards (1993) investigated the effect of everyday memory on our cleverness to accurat ely recall roman yields on a clock. The advantage of using such method was useful , as the progeny four was represented differently on a clock than to how it appears in roman numerals. Therefore, by varying the conditions in which participants engaged, they were able to detect whether participants resorted to using their stately memory when trying to draw and recall the shapes on the clock. The three conditions included (forewarned) where participants were instructed to look at the clock for a short period of time, as they would be asked to draw it after it had been interpreted away from their sight, (surprise) in this condition participants were simply asked to look at the clock, then later asked to draw it at one time it had been taken away, (copy) in this condition participants were instructed to draw the clock that appeared in front of them. Their results indicated that in the forewarned and surprise condition, participants were more likely to make mistakes and draw the em bodiment four as IV, whereas those participants in the copy condition drew the figure four precisely to how it appeared on the clock e.g. IIII. Therefore it appears that the participants in the two memory conditions were more likely to recall information based on their schematic memory, this supports the theory that schemas do directly influence how we recall and represent information.However a demarcation that stems from this study is that the participants in the copy condition were effortlessly outline the clock that appeared in front of them, therefore schemas were not useful when asked to draw the clock. A study that ac enumerations for this limitation is by Richard, French and Harris (1996). In their study the same method was applied, as participants engaged in 3 conditions, (forewarned, surprise, copy) and were asked to draw the clock but additionally they were asked to participate in a recognition task afterward. Their results showed that the participants in the copy cond ition, when asked to ask between two pictures and identify which of the two clocks presented to them had the correct figure i.e. (4). Participants were more likely to recall the figure (4) being represented as IV on the clock alternatively than IIII.In sum, while these bumpings provide record that schemas do have an impact on our mightiness to recall and recognise information. Much of the research conducted is outdated. Therefore, the purposes cited above suggests that more recent research is to be conducted to find out whether the same results would be obtained at this present time. For this reason, the current study aimed to repeat the same procedure apply in previous research in order to shed light on this issue. Since findings have been consistent, we proposed two experimental hypothesis based on Richard Harris (1993) and French Harris (1996) findings , which is stated belowH1 In the bill of exchange task, there result be a significant difference between the two condi tions i.e. memory condition and copy condition. The participants in the memory condition will be more likely to incorrectly represent the figure (4) as IV compared to participants in the copy condition.H2 In the recognition task, there will be a significant difference between the two conditions i.e. memory condition and copy condition. Of the participants who accurately represented the figure four as IIII in the drawing task, those in the copy condition will be more likely to accurately recall the figure four as IIII compared to participants in the memory condition.method actingParticipantsIn the study 61 students were undertaking this experiment . However, two were excluded from the analysis because one participant drew the clock with 1,2,3,4 o clock etc. rather than Roman numerals, and a arcminute did not complete the critical IIII or IV choice. Therefore our data only included a total number of 59 participants, this included 4 males and 55 females, aged between 18 and 30 years o ld. The mean for the age=19.21, SD=1.18, range=18-30.The participants were all undergraduate psychological science students at Queen Mary University of London and were selected from 1st year undergraduate at Queen Mary. The participants were appropriately briefed prior to the experiment and informed consent was obtained. Lastly, the researcher ensured that all ethical guidelines were met and was approved by Queen Mary University of London Ethics Committee.DesignIn this experiment, a between -subject design was utilize as participants only took part in one condition. The researcher also insured that all participants were randomly allocated to each condition. The in parasitical variable were the three types of conditions (surprise, forewarned and copy). While the dependent variable was whether participants drew or recognised the figure (4) as IV or IIII and how frequently participants recall or recognised the figure (4) as being IV or IIII.ProcedureSmall groups of participants took p art in each condition, this was to ensure that all participants observed the clock clearly and no obstructions were present. The clock used in the original studies was a standard clock made by Samuel Bishop of London, with clear Roman Numerals on the face. The figure (4) appeared as IIII on the clock. The time on the clock was adjusted at ten past seven. In this current experiment, a picture of the clock was employed rather than the actual clock used in French and Richard (1993) study.The experiment compromised of 3 conditions (forewarned, surprise and copy). Each group of participants were assigned to one of these conditions. These conditions were carried out chronologically.In the first condition (surprise). Participants were informed to simply look at the clock for a period of 5 minutes. Once the picture had been taken away from their sight. Participants were then asked to draw the clock from memory.In the second condition (forewarned). Participants were informed that they would be asked to draw the clock after observing the clock for a short period of time. But that they could only draw the clock, once the image had been taken out of their sight.In the third condition (copy). Participants were informed to observe the clock and draw the clock.In all the conditions participants were asked to state on their drawing sheet their age, awake, conditions ( and personal identifier, this was composed of their mothers first two initials and their date of birth.In all the conditions (forewarned, surprise, copy) a recognition task was also carried out after the drawing task. This was the same method employed by Richard Harris (1996) in their study. In the recognition task, participants were presented with two pictures of the clock at the same time and asked to choose the correct picture that matched the clock that they had previously observed. In each of the group, half of the participants obtained both pictures in which the correct picture was placed on the left, an d the rest of the participants obtained both pictures in which the correct picture was placed on the right. After participants had made their choice they were asked to write down which conditions they took part in (i.e. 1st, 2nd or 3rd) age, sex and personal identifier this was to ensure that their data from the drawing task could be matched accordingly. MW1ResultsCount 24 7IV Expected count 18.4 12.6Count 11 17IIII Expected count 16.6 11.4MC CCCount 4 11IV Expected count 5.7 9.3Count 7 7IIII Expected count 5.3 8.7All the participants drawing were assessed to see whether they presented the figure four as IV or IIII. The frequency of this is shown for each condition is shown below.There was no difference in the results between the forewarned and surprised condition, as a result these two data were collapsed into one condition called memory condition, this was carried out in order to growth the statistical power of the render. Given the test is categorical, we used a non-parametric test to examine whether the differences were significant. A chi-square test was conducted on the data. The test revealed that there was a significant difference between how participants represented the number 4 in each condition, chi-square (1)=8.87,p=. 003.In the recognition data, analysis was only taken for those participants who accurately dew four as IIII in the first part of the study (drawing task) .A chi-square was conducted on the data to see if there was a significant difference in participants ability to identify the correct clock from two possible options, whether they had previously copied or drawn it from memory. The test revealed that there was no significant difference between the choices in recall made by participatns in the mempry and copy condition, chi-square (1)=1.68, p .05MW3DiscussionThis study aimed to add to previous old research by looking at whether the same result would be found at this current time. The results showed that in the drawing task there was a significant difference in the frequencies i.e. whether they accurately or wrongly represented the figure (4) as either IV or IIII between the two conditions. However there was no significant difference between the numbers of correct recalls made by participants in the recognition task. Therefore, our first experimental hypothesis is supported while our second hypothesis is rejected. This shows that in the drawing task, those participants in the memory conditions who incorrectly represented the figure (4) as IV were more likely to use their schematic memory rather than actually processing the information. However those participants in the copy condition who accurately drew the figure (4) in the drawing task butwrongly recalled the figure (4) as IV in the drawing task. This shows that observing the clock while drawing did not facilitate the participant in processing or encoding that information, thus affecting their ability to accurately recall it later on.MW4These findings are in acc ordance with Williams et al (1993) study that found that in the drawing task, participants in the copy condition were accurate in their representation of the four compared to participants in the memory condition (forewarned and surprised). Additionally, our results is partially supported by Richard, French et al (1996) who found that those in the copy condition were more likely to recall the figure (4) inaccurately though they had represented the number 4 accurately in the drawing task. A plausible explanation, may be that participants were effortlessly drawing what appeared in front of them, therefore more likely to get it right in the drawing task but when asked to recall the information as they did not pay attention they resorted to using their schemas in order to recall what the figure (4) appeared as on the clock.However, unlike our results this study did find a significant difference between the memory condition and copy condition when asked to recall. As those in the memory c ondition who represented the figure (4) accurately in the drawing task, none of these participants inaccurately recalled the four in the recognition task.The fact that that these results are only partially consistent with previous research points to a possible limitation within the study. Due to our study consisting a small sample size, this suggests a possibility in creating a Type II MW5error. A type two error is falsely rejecting the null hypothesis and stating that the results are due to chance. Therefore having a larger sample may have yielded more statistically powerful results, this is supported by Richard et al (1996) who found a statistically significant difference. Additionally, using a different statistical test may have been better given the small sample size, a good alternative would have been a Fisher exact test MW6this is once again supported by Richard et al (1996) who found statistically significant difference when running a fisher test.Further, one possible expla nation for the outcome of this result is the impact of interference on students schematic memoryMW7. A study by Nickerson and Adams (1979) suggested that participants who drew the penny incorrectly may have have difficulty in differentiating between features of an old and current penny. This results indicates that roman numerals learned at school may have interfered with participatns ability to form new memories of the clock face, this is increasingly more prominent in younger students as they have had less exposure to roman numeral clock faces. Therefore participants may have recognised the number 4 as IV rather than IIII.Finally, the impact of these findings are not only interesting, but could hold significance in real life situations . In a case study in which a young lady Jennfier Thompson (1984) was raped, it was found that when asked to identity her rapist she falsely accused an innocent man . This finding suggest that memories are not infallible and can be influenced easily b y schemas or other factors.Nickerson, R. S., Adams, M. J. (1979). Long-term memory for a common object.Cognitive Psychology,11(3), 287-307.MW1Perfect method, wellhead done MW2You need to portion out the forewarned and surprise memory conditions in the initial frequency table. You can then explain why the conditions were collapsed together afterwards (this is what Richards and co did)MW3This isnt reported correctly. You need to put it inside brackets, and you need to use the Greek symbol for Chi which is MW4If youre looking to cut words, I think these two paragraphs can be shortened.MW5This is written as Type IIGood old roman numerals MW6Needs capitals Fishers Exact evidenceMW7As I said before, this is not a limitation. This is a possible explanation for the results.