Bartlett's schema theory: The unreplicated …

1 Bartlett s schema theory : the unreplicated portrait d homme series from 1932 Claus-Christian Carbon and Sabine AlbrechtDepartment of General Psychology and Methodology, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, GermanyIn 1932, Frederic Bartlett laid the foundation for the later schema theory . His key assumption of pre-vious knowledge affecting the processing of new stimuli was illustrated in the famous portraitd homme series . Sequenced reproductions of ambiguous stimuli showed progressive Bartlett pointed out, activation of specific schemata, for instance the face schema , biasesmemory retrieval towards such schemata. Infive experiments (Experiment 1,n=53; Experiment 2,n=177; Experiment 3,n=36; Experiment 4,n=6; Experiment 5,n=2), we tested several factorspotentially influencing retrieval biases for example, by varying the general procedure of reproduction(repeated vs. serial) and by omitting versus providing visual or semantic cues for activating face sche-mata. Participants inspected face-like stimuli with the caption portrait of the human and reproducedthem repeatedly under specific conditions.

2 None of the experiments revealed a systematic tendencytowards Bartlett s described case, even when the participants were explicitly instructed to draw a face like the previously inspected one. In one of the serial reproduction experiments, we evenobtained contrary effects with decreasing face-likeness over the reproduction generations. A close analy-sis of the originalfindings raises questions about the replicability of Bartlett sfindings, qualifying the portrait d homme series more or less as an illustrative example of the main idea of : Perceptual learning; Learning and memory; Face; Object; schema theory ; Prototype theory ;Adaptation; Distortion; his seminal bookRemembering(Bartlett, 1932),Sir Frederic C. Bartlett laid the foundations forhis later schema theory . One classicfinding con-tinuously described in books on cognitive scienceand referred to in numerous research articlesillustrates the impact of the schema theory ,although it has not been empirically tested yet(see Edwards & Middleton, 1987).

3 In the courseof repeated reproduction, a face-like but somehowambiguous visual stimulus will increasingly beCorrespondence should be addressed to Claus-Christian Carbon, University of Bamberg, Department of General Psychology andMethodology, Markusplatz 3, D-96047 Bamberg, Germany. E-mail: study was supported by a research grant (St ndige Kommission f r Forschung und wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchs; FNK) ofthe University of Bamberg to Claus-Christian Carbon and a grant by the Women s Representatives given to Sabine Albrecht. Wethank Uwe Fischer, J rn Freese, Vera M. Hesslinger, Ruth Kaltenbach, and Andrea Lyman for helping in writing the manuscriptand Maximilian Straif for preparing parts of the stimulus material. The permission of rights of Cambridge University Press and theAmerican Psychological Association to reprint original illustrations is also gratefully #2012 The Experimental Psychology QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY2012, 65 (11), 2258 2270 Downloaded by [Vienna University Library] at 13:20 18 October 2012 changed towards a simple and prototypical 1 shows the original picture series consistingof one original (Original Drawing) and nine suc-cessive reproductions (1 9).

4 Bartlett noted a couple of characteristics of thedevelopment of reproduction. The most importantcharacteristic was that drawings became more andmore face-like. Additionally, he observed the draw-ings becoming increasingly simplified and more conventional (Bartlett, 1932, p. 185). It is ofmajor importance that the caption ( portraitd homme ) was continuously used for eachdrawing. Bartlett himself stressed that in theearly experiments on perceiving it became clearthat the assignment of a name to objects observedoften strongly influenced their immediate repro-duction or description (Bartlett, 1932, p. 183).Pioneering work on this aspect was done byCarmichael, Hogen, and Walter (1932) whodemonstrated that the mere naming of an ambigu-ous stimulus directs the observer s interpretationtowards the representation activated by thecaption of the stimulus (see Figure 2).These effects have been replicated in variousdomains for instance, even understanding andappreciation of art are modulated by entitling theartwork (Leder, Carbon, & Ripsas, 2006).

5 Wewould like to summarize this factor as the naming hypothesis . Other factors influencingspecific schemata might be the delay betweeninspection and reproduction of stimuli (seeWheeler & Roediger, 1992), the context andinstruction during both phases (von Hippel,Jonides, Hilton, & Narayan, 1993), and the specifickind of reproduction technique for example, repeated reproduction , during which peoplehave to reproduce their own reproduction againand again, or serial reproduction (see Bartlett,1932), which follows the idea of Chinese Bartlett s schema theory is clearly animportant part of the classic theories of cognitivepsychology and is obviously present in everydaylife experiences, empirical proof of his originalexperiments on remembering (Bartlett, 1932)using picture material is sparse, and paradigmshave not been replicated so studyIn the present study, we test several factors to ident-ify key variables triggering schemata sensu Bartlett(1932), mainly thenaming hypothesis.

6 Therefore, wereplicated Bartlett s methods of repeated (Experiments 1 and 5) and serial reproduction (Experiments 2, 3, and 4). In both experimentalprocedures, participants had to draw previouslyFigure 1. Original illustration of the portrait d homme series by Bartlett (1932) often found in text books of cognitive psychology. Thenaming of the depiction ( portrait d homme ) was always reproduced. FromRemembering: A Study in Experimental and SocialPsychology(pp. 178 179), by F. C. Bartlett, 1932, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Copyright 1932 by CambridgeUniversity Press. Reprinted with QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 65 (11)2259 BARTLETT S schema THEORYD ownloaded by [Vienna University Library] at 13:20 18 October 2012 Figure 2. Illustration of the ambiguous stimuli used in the study of Carmichael, Hogen, and Walter (1932) (see in the centre) and someexamples of drawings evoked by different naming of the stimuli (see left and right). From An Experimental Study of the Effect ofLanguage on the Reproduction of Visually Perceived Form , by L.

7 Carmichael, H. P. Hogen, and A. A. Walter, 1932,Journal ofExperimental Psychology, 15(1),p. 75. Copyright 1932 by the American Psychological Association. Reprinted with permission. Thematerial is now in the public QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 65 (11)CARBON AND ALBRECHTD ownloaded by [Vienna University Library] at 13:20 18 October 2012 inspected sketches. In the repeated procedure, eachparticipant reproduced the same initial objectseveral times in a row, whereas participants in theserial procedure reproduced one single stimulus,and then the drawing was shown to another partici-pant, who then had to reproduce it, and so on. Weemployed both procedures in one study to increaseexternal validity of the effects of the tested factorson the reproduction quality and direction. To testthe naming hypothesis,we omitted any explicitreference to faces in Experiments 1 and 2,whereas we made such a reference in Experiments3 and 4 and even biased participants towards facereproduction in a rather suggestive way inExperiment 5.

8 To test the impact of delaybetween inspection of the pictures and reproduc-tion, we implemented delays of 15 min, 24 hours,and one week, respectively. As we were also inter-ested in the impact of initial face-likeness of thestimulus material, we varied this experimental vari-able on three and six levels, A: ASSESSMENT OFFACE-LIKENESS OF BARTLETT S portrait D homme SERIESAs an initial test, we assessed the face-likeness ofBartlett s (1932) portrait d homme series ,because it is not clear that an increasing face-like-ness was indeed obtained by Bartlett. In fact, theface-likeness was never empirically students (undergraduates and graduates) ofthe University of Bamberg (2 female, mean age= years, range: 19 46 years) participated. Allof them were na ve to the purpose of the used the reproductions that were done in thefirst six (reproduction) sessions of Bartlett s por-trait d homme series (Reproductions 1 6, seeFigure 1), which were obtained via serial reproduc-tion (see details in the Procedure section ofExperiment 2).

9 In contrast to Bartlett s originaldrawing, we presented them without the caption portrait d homme to avoid suggesting that thiswas the portrait of a human, which in this casewould be evidently very evaluated one stimulus after another ina randomized order on a 7-point Likert scale(1= not face-like at all to 7= very face-like ).There was no time limit for the and discussionThe ratings are shown in Table one-way repeated measurement analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) withsession numberas awithin-subjects factor revealed a strong increase inface-likeness from Reproduction 1 toReproduction 6,F(5, 30)= ,p,.0001, p2=. B: ASSESSMENT OFFACE-LIKENESS OF THE STIMULIAs the initial face-likeness seems to be an impor-tant variable for triggering face-specific remem-bering processes (sensu Bartlett, 1932), we variedthe face-likeness of new stimuli on a maximum ofsix levels. To validate our manipulation of face-like-ness, in Prestudy B participants had to assess A: Means and standard deviations of the face-likeness rating of the portrait d homme seriesSession :Ratings: 1= not face-like at all ;7= very face-like.

10 THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 65 (11)2261 BARTLETT S schema THEORYD ownloaded by [Vienna University Library] at 13:20 18 October 2012 MethodParticipantsSeven undergraduate students of the University ofBamberg (2 female, mean age= years, range:21 30 years) participated. All of them were na veto the purpose of the used six more-or-less face-like pictures, ofwhich one (Figure 3, Object 1) was Bartlett s(1932) original starting image of the portraitd homme series . The other pictures were specifi-cally created for the present study to ensure unfami-liarity of the stimulus material due to potentialdisplays of the original material in basic psychologi-cal courses. To ensure full compatibility betweenthe procedure of Bartlett s studies and the presentstudy, we used the same subtitle (German: portrait des Menschen , portrait of thehuman ).ProcedureParticipants evaluated one stimulus after another ina randomized order on a 7-point Likert scale(1= not face-like at all to 7= very face-like )without a time and discussionThe mean face-likeness values are displayed inFigure 3.