html5-img
1 / 12

Bransford (1972 ). Contextual Prerequisites for Understanding .

Bransford (1972 ). Contextual Prerequisites for Understanding. Background:

micah
Download Presentation

Bransford (1972 ). Contextual Prerequisites for Understanding .

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. Background: Bartlett introduced schema theory 1930 and the psychological field has adopted the importance that schemas explain in retrieval of memory. The Bartlett study couldn’t explain when the schemas were important. Are they active before the information is processed or after?

  2. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. AIM: to examine the weight of contextual understanding (available schema) on encoding and retrieval of a paragraph, assumed that the contextual understanding happens before or after the reading. If the participant had a clue beforehand they read the text they would probably easier collect a schema of the content. The hypothesis was: memory are formed when reading a passage is a synthesis, a production, of the schemata.

  3. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. PROCEDURE: Three groups, each consisting of 17 high school students, all heard read aloud a vague passage of text about doing laundry. One of the experimental groups obtained information in advance . Another group obtained information after. The third group obtained no information at all. Two minutes after reading the text, all participants were asked to recall as many ideas as possible from the text. There was also a comprehension task, in which participants explained if they had recognized the core ideas. The researchers valued participant answers in a way that an answer was correct if the essence of the meaning of a sentence were pointed out.

  4. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. RESULTS: As expected, both recall and comprehension was improved in the “before condition”. No difference in the control group.

  5. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. CONCLUSION: It is not enough to trigger the schema afterwards, because if there is no schema acrtivatedfrom the beginning then encoding cannot be successful.

  6. Bransford (1972).ContextualPrerequisites for Understanding. EVALUATION: What is the research method in this study? What are the variables? Would the result of the experiment be different with only one group? Is this task sufficient to allow generalization to all human experience?

  7. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. BACKGROUND: Psychologistsclaimsthat the abilitytodevelop information on sex-typing schemas doesthisearly in life. Sex-typing schemas helps the childtoorganize and navigatethrough information processing. It is becomingeasiertodeterminewhat kind ofbehaviour is typicalmale and typicalfemale. New information mighteitherdistortolder schemas or fit into an older existing schema.

  8. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. AIM: The experiment wasaiming for decidinghow existing sex-typing schemas distortmemoriesofexperiencethatareinconsistentwith existing schemas

  9. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. PARTICIPANTS: 48 children (24 boys, 24 girls) in the age ofbetween 5 and 6.

  10. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. PROCEDURE: The childrenwereshown 16 pictures, the pictureswereshown for 10 secondsindividually. The questionthatfollowedwastoidentify sex and age of the actor on the picture. The actorwasconstantly a woman, a girl, a man or a boy. The participantsweresupposedtoassespicturethat for halfofthemindicated a traditional gender stereotype and the otherhalf the actorindicated a behaviourthatwas an inconsistent gender stereotype. The participantswerethensupposedto rate themselvesiftheyweresimilar or not. The childrenwerethentested (1 week later) iftheyremember and whattheyremember. If theyremember an activitytheywereaskedhowconfifenttheywere in haveseenthatactivity. The childrenused blocks toidentifytheiranswers. At last the childrenwereaskedwhoperformed the activity (man, woman, boy girl).

  11. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. RESULTS: Boys sndgirlsweremorelikelytomisremember the the sex of an actor on inconsistentpictures. Thwyweremoreconfident in the sex of the sex of the actoronbconsistentpicturesthan on inconsistent.

  12. Martin and Halverson (1983).The effectsof sex-typing schemas on Young children’smemory. ISSUES: What is consistent sex-relatedbehaviour and what is not?

More Related