Sternberg: Cognitive Psychology
Schematic Representations
Schemas
Mental framework for organising knowledge, creates a meaningful structure of related
concepts
Similar to semantic networks, but more task-oriented
Both concepts & schemas can be viewed at many levels of analysis, depending on the
mind of the individual (expertise) & the context
Schemas have several characteristics that ensure wide flexibility in their use:
1) Schemas can include other schemas, e.g., a schema for animals includes a schema
for cows, etc.
2) Schemas encompass typical, general facts that can vary slightly from one specific
instance to another, e.g., schema for animals includes that they have fur, but also
allows for humans, who are less hairy than most mammals
3) Schemas can vary in their degree of abstraction, e.g., a schema for ‘justice’ is
more abstract than schema for ‘fruit’
Schemas can also have info about relationships, e.g., relationships between:
1) Concepts (between trucks & cars)
2) Attributes within concepts (height & weight of elephant)
3) Attributes in related concepts (redness of a cherry & redness of an apple)
4) Concepts & particular contexts (fish & ocean)
5) Specific concepts & general background knowledge (concepts about US
presidents & general knowledge about US government, history)
Causal (if-then) relationships within schemas
E.g., schema for ‘glass’ if glass object falls onto hard surface, it will break
Problem with schemas
Give rise to stereotypes
Scripts
Scripts contain info about particular order in which things occur. Less flexible than
schemas
Scripts include default values for actors, props, setting, etc. These values altogether
create an overview of event
E.g., a restaurant script props = table, menu, etc. Roles = waiter, customer, etc.
Studies
Bower: participants presented with 18 brief stories, then asked to perform one of 2
tasks: 1) Recall task (asked to recall as much as possible from stories). Participants
recalled details that were not mentioned in the story, but in the script. 2) Recognition
task (presented with statements, had to rate how confident they were that they had
seen these statements before. Participants likely to say that they had seen non-story
sentences that were script-relevant)
, Frames = type of schema in which info about objects and their properties is stored, e.g.,
building has floors & walls, but the material from which the building is constructed may vary
across buildings
Eysenck: Cognitive Psychology: Student’s Handbook
Schema Theory: Bartlett
Our processing of stories involves relating the info in text to relevant knowledge in
LTM (knowledge in the form of schemas)
Ghosh & Gilboa argued that schemas possess 4 necessary & sufficient features:
1) Associative structure schemas consist of interconnected units
2) Basis in multiple episodes schemas consist of integrated info based on several
similar events
3) Lack of unit detail variability of events from which any given schema is
formed
4) Adaptability schemas change & adapt over time as they are updated in light of
new info
Bartlett: adaptability most important
Other 4 least often found in schema theories
Why are schemas important?
1) They contain info needed to understand what we hear & read
2) They allow us to form expectations (e.g., typical sequence of events at a
restaurant). They make the world more predictable
Bransford & Johnson study: how schemas influence story comprehension
Heard a passage that didn’t really make sense. But those who got the title of the
text beforehand (“washing clothes”) understood it better
Relevant schema knowledge helped passage comprehension rather than simply
acting as a retrieval cue
Bartlett: schemas play an important role in determining how we remember stories –
memory is affected not only by presented story, but also by reader’s store of relevant
prior schematic knowledge. So, comprehension of (and memory for) discourse depend
on top-down processes triggered by schemas
Bartlett presented stories that produced a conflict between the story itself & prior
knowledge, e.g., from a different culture. Prior knowledge might produce distortions
in the remembered version of the story, moulding it to be more conventional to your
own cultural background. So, what would be remembered would be inaccurate
Bartlett focused on 3 types of error:
1) Rationalisation involves distortions designed to make recall more rational &
in line with the reader’s own cultural expectations
2) Levelling omitting unfamiliar details from recall
3) Sharpening selecting certain details for embellishment (doesn’t have to be
rational, could just be more interesting)
There are 2 ways schematic knowledge may cause rationalisations:
Schematic Representations
Schemas
Mental framework for organising knowledge, creates a meaningful structure of related
concepts
Similar to semantic networks, but more task-oriented
Both concepts & schemas can be viewed at many levels of analysis, depending on the
mind of the individual (expertise) & the context
Schemas have several characteristics that ensure wide flexibility in their use:
1) Schemas can include other schemas, e.g., a schema for animals includes a schema
for cows, etc.
2) Schemas encompass typical, general facts that can vary slightly from one specific
instance to another, e.g., schema for animals includes that they have fur, but also
allows for humans, who are less hairy than most mammals
3) Schemas can vary in their degree of abstraction, e.g., a schema for ‘justice’ is
more abstract than schema for ‘fruit’
Schemas can also have info about relationships, e.g., relationships between:
1) Concepts (between trucks & cars)
2) Attributes within concepts (height & weight of elephant)
3) Attributes in related concepts (redness of a cherry & redness of an apple)
4) Concepts & particular contexts (fish & ocean)
5) Specific concepts & general background knowledge (concepts about US
presidents & general knowledge about US government, history)
Causal (if-then) relationships within schemas
E.g., schema for ‘glass’ if glass object falls onto hard surface, it will break
Problem with schemas
Give rise to stereotypes
Scripts
Scripts contain info about particular order in which things occur. Less flexible than
schemas
Scripts include default values for actors, props, setting, etc. These values altogether
create an overview of event
E.g., a restaurant script props = table, menu, etc. Roles = waiter, customer, etc.
Studies
Bower: participants presented with 18 brief stories, then asked to perform one of 2
tasks: 1) Recall task (asked to recall as much as possible from stories). Participants
recalled details that were not mentioned in the story, but in the script. 2) Recognition
task (presented with statements, had to rate how confident they were that they had
seen these statements before. Participants likely to say that they had seen non-story
sentences that were script-relevant)
, Frames = type of schema in which info about objects and their properties is stored, e.g.,
building has floors & walls, but the material from which the building is constructed may vary
across buildings
Eysenck: Cognitive Psychology: Student’s Handbook
Schema Theory: Bartlett
Our processing of stories involves relating the info in text to relevant knowledge in
LTM (knowledge in the form of schemas)
Ghosh & Gilboa argued that schemas possess 4 necessary & sufficient features:
1) Associative structure schemas consist of interconnected units
2) Basis in multiple episodes schemas consist of integrated info based on several
similar events
3) Lack of unit detail variability of events from which any given schema is
formed
4) Adaptability schemas change & adapt over time as they are updated in light of
new info
Bartlett: adaptability most important
Other 4 least often found in schema theories
Why are schemas important?
1) They contain info needed to understand what we hear & read
2) They allow us to form expectations (e.g., typical sequence of events at a
restaurant). They make the world more predictable
Bransford & Johnson study: how schemas influence story comprehension
Heard a passage that didn’t really make sense. But those who got the title of the
text beforehand (“washing clothes”) understood it better
Relevant schema knowledge helped passage comprehension rather than simply
acting as a retrieval cue
Bartlett: schemas play an important role in determining how we remember stories –
memory is affected not only by presented story, but also by reader’s store of relevant
prior schematic knowledge. So, comprehension of (and memory for) discourse depend
on top-down processes triggered by schemas
Bartlett presented stories that produced a conflict between the story itself & prior
knowledge, e.g., from a different culture. Prior knowledge might produce distortions
in the remembered version of the story, moulding it to be more conventional to your
own cultural background. So, what would be remembered would be inaccurate
Bartlett focused on 3 types of error:
1) Rationalisation involves distortions designed to make recall more rational &
in line with the reader’s own cultural expectations
2) Levelling omitting unfamiliar details from recall
3) Sharpening selecting certain details for embellishment (doesn’t have to be
rational, could just be more interesting)
There are 2 ways schematic knowledge may cause rationalisations:
