URIM KIM
Schema Theory - ERQ
‘Evaluate schema theory’
As information processing systems, humans have the unique ability to constantly be processing,
encoding, and acting on information received from the outside world. With the constant flow of stimuli
from the environment, it is impossible for all inputs and information to be processed by any single
individual without it becoming overwhelming. However, humans also possess schemas, a unique
cognitive framework, that allows for this constant input of information to be filtered and organized.
Schema theory suggests that the encoding of information is an interactive process between
individuals’ pre-existing schemas and the input of information. In other words, it suggests that in
individuals, the encoding of information relies on schemas. Cognitive schemas are abstract mental
representations of an individual’s pre-existing knowledge, derived from patterns from prior experience.
There are many types of schemas. A schema of an event is referred to as a script; social schemas, are
called stereotypes; and schemas that organize information about oneself is referred to as a self-schema.
Schemas have both a backward- and forward-looking function. They can help simplify the construction
of memory but also have the ability to aid in the retrieval and reconstruction of memories. Furthermore,
schemas have the potential to distort the memories individuals recall or encode as information is often
perceived in line with existing schemas.
A study that supports schema theory is Bartlett’s 1932 study on the effect of cultural schemas
on memory. In this study, Bartlett aimed to study whether cultural backgrounds would affect the
distortion of memory. Bartlett used the Native American story “The War of the Ghosts”. Participants
were all of British origin; so, despite the story containing known names and concepts, the style of this
story was of a foreign nature to them. Participants were allocated to two different conditions: the
repeated production condition, which required participants to reproduce the story several times over a
set period of time, and the serial reproduction condition, which required for the recalling and passing
down of the story from participant to participant.
The results showed no significant difference in the way the story was recalled between the two
conditions. In both conditions, the story became shorter over time and more conventional as
participants reconstructed details in the story to those that could be better assimilated with the English
culture. For example, Bartlett noted in the reproductions of the story that words such as “canoe” or
“paddling” were changed to “boat” and “rowing” – words that are more familiar in the English culture.
Overtime, participants’ alterations to the story made it more consistent with their own cultural
expectations. Through this study, Bartlett concluded that in the process of memory encoding and
retrieval, individuals alter information for it to fit within their personal schemas which shows the effect
of schemas in the cognitive processing of memories.
Bartlett’s study, despite inspiring further research into schemas, has many limitations. In
general, its method lacks clarity, making it difficult to replicate for validity. Additionally, the small sample
size leads to difficulties in generalising. Furthermore, as a laboratory experiment, this study lacks
ecological validity.
Another study that investigates schema theory is Anderson and Pichert: schemas influence on
retrieval. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of schemas in the retrieval of
information from the LTM. In this study, participants were assigned one specific perspective
(perspective of a homebuyer or burglar) to a story about a house where two boys were staying to skip
school. The passage contained 73 total ideas, some of which were more interesting in the perspective of
URIM KIM
Schema Theory - ERQ
a burglar and some that were more interesting to a homebuyer. Once participants read the passage,
they were given a filler task before being asked to reproduce the story in as much detail as possible.
Participants were then given a second filler task then asked to reproduce the story once again. However,
in the second reproduction, some participants were required to change the perspective that they were
initially assigned. Other participants kept the same perspective.
The results showed that participants who changed their perspective recalled an additional 7.1%
information important to the alternate perspective but unimportant to the initial. As the passage wasn’t
reread before the second recall, the results suggest that the additional information had be encoded in
the participants’ memory but not retrieved. Further suggesting that a change of perspective can affect
information retrieval. The different perspectives in this study are different schemas. Therefore, this
study supports Schema theory and the idea that schemas influence the retrieval process of already
stored information in the LTM.
This study was laboratory experiment, which provided a highly controllable environment,
allowing for the establishment of stronger cause and effect relationships. Furthermore, the replicability
of this study, allows for it to be tested for validity. However, the highly controlled environment of this
study decreases its ecological validity making the results less applicable in a real life setting.
Schema theory is valuable as it seemingly explains how the human mind organises, interprets,
encodes, and retrieves information. It demonstrates usefulness as it allows for cognitive processes, such
as memory distortions and false memories to be better understood. Furthermore, schema theory is
strongly supported by significant amounts of research. However, despite this extensive research, the
concept of schema is extremely vague and hypothetical. It’s too widely applicable and can practically
represent any imaginable form of knowledge. Schemas have no real way of being measured as the
effects caused by schemas can only be inferred. In addition to not being able to directly measure the
effect of schemas, it’s unclear how they are initially acquired. The vagueness of schemas and the
inability of its processes to be directly observed or measured defeats its value and practicality.
Schema theory is significantly limited in preciseness and clarity. However, it demonstrates
potential to be useful in the further understanding of the human mind. Schemas are seemingly able to
vaguely explain a valuable cognitive function behind the processing of information. Therefore, in order
to provide practical value, the concept of schema needs to be sharpened.