IB Psychology HL 3.4.4 Schema theory Question Bank

Refer to the paper 1 section A markbands when awarding marks.
The command term "explain" requires candidates to give a detailed account, including reasons and causes, for reconstructive memory.

Explanation of the nature of reconstructive memory could include, but is not limited to:
- Confabulation - a memory based on a fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memory, often believed to be true in spite of contradictory evidence
- schema processing - memory processing based on prior knowledge in the form of schemas that could result in distortion
- false memories - recalling an event that never happened and believing it to be true
- post-event information - any details or information encountered after an event has occurred that can influence or alter a person's memory of the original event.

Examples of appropriate studies could include but are not limited to:
- Bartlett's (1932) "War of the ghosts" study
- Brewer and Treyens's (1981) study on in-office schema
- Neisser and Harsh's (1992) Challenger disaster study
- Loftus and Pickerell's (1995) "lost in a mall" study
- Shaw and Porter (2015) - implanting false memories of a crime
- Loftus and Palmer's (1974) car crash study
- Yuille and Cutshall's (1986) study of the effect of leading questions on eye-witnesses to a real crime

If a candidate explains reconstructive memory without making reference to a relevant study, up to a maximum of [5] should be awarded.

If a candidate only describes a relevant study without explaining reconstructive memory, up to a maximum of [4] should be awarded.

If a candidate refers to more than one study, credit should be given only to the first study.