User:Lridley097/Schema (psychology)

"Bartlett's work was crucially important in demonstrating that long-term memories are neither fixed nor immutable but are constantly being adjusted as schemata evolve with experience. In a sense it supports the existentialist view that people construct the past and present in a constant process of narrative/discursive adjustment, and that much of what people "remember" is actually confabulated (adjusted and rationalized) narrative that allows them to think of the past as a continuous and coherent string of events, even though it is probable that large sections of memory (both episodic and semantic) are irretrievable at any given time."

Bartlett's work was crucially important in demonstrating that long-term memories are neither fixed nor immutable but are constantly being adjusted as schemata evolve with experience. His work contributed to a framework of memory retrieval in which people construct the past and present in a constant process of narrative/discursive adjustment. Much of what people "remember" is confabulated narrative (adjusted and rationalized) which allows them to think of the past as a continuous and coherent string of events, even though it is probably that large sections of memory (both episodic and semantic) are irretrievable at any given time."

After viewing the talk page, I agree the information relating schema to existentialism ought to be removed. Specifically, the connection to existentialism. The information following is not so much a problem, but connecting it to a philosophical viewpoint is, in my opinion, an inference beyond the scope of the article. The source the information is cited with does not anywhere mention existentialism either. Additionally, this sentence is long and somewhat difficult to follow.

Propose to Add under Schema Therapy: After the sentence: "Examples include schemata of abandonment/instability, mistrust/abuse, emotional deprivation, and defectiveness/shame," in its own paragraph related to the cognitive behavioral approach to changing schema".

Maladaptive schemata can be a contributing factor to treatment outcomes of mental disorders and the maintenance of ideas, beliefs, and behaviors towards oneself and others. In seeking to improve both symptomology and behaviors, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) approaches work to increase the availability and strength of adaptive schemas while reducing maladaptive ones. Schemas such as these may be framed in absolutes, such as "I am worthless". An approach to change this schema must first identity the existing schema and then identify an alternative, such as "I am valuable". Because of the difficulty in schema modification, absolutes are important for changing problematic schemata, otherwise the initial belief may persist, and the alternative belief becomes the exception. Due to the automatic retrieval of schemata, modification takes time. ^[1]

Propose to add after, "There are three major implications of self-schemata. First, information about oneself is processed faster and more efficiently, especially consistent information. Second, one retrieves and remembers information that is relevant to one's self-schema. Third, one will tend to resist information in the environment that is contradictory to one's self-schema. For instance, students with a particular self-schema prefer roommates whose view of them is consistent with that schema. Students who end up with roommates whose view of them is inconsistent with their self-schema are more likely to try to find a new roommate, even if this view is positive. This is an example of self-verification." Even in the face of undeniable contradictory evidence, the example which violates an existing schema may be considered "the exception" to a rule; the rule then persists and the thought process or behavior pattern is unchanged. This may be positive or negative; if the rule is, "I am a good person", then the examples which may disprove this become exceptions and do not violate the existing schema. However, if the rule is, "I am a lazy", then circumstances which violate this become the exception, and the holder of the schema may grant extenuating reasons or circumstances as to why the situation is an exception and not an argument against the schema. ^[1]

Propose to put this at the end of this section: "However, schemata can influence and hamper the uptake of new information (proactive interference), such as when existing stereotypes, giving rise to limited or biased discourses and expectations (prejudices), lead an individual to "see" or "remember" something that has not happened because it is more believable in terms of his/her schema. For example, if a well-dressed businessman draws a knife on a vagrant, the schemata of onlookers may (and often do) lead them to "remember" the vagrant pulling the knife. Such distortion of memory has been demonstrated. (See § Background research below.)"

The creation of initial schemata is not always accurate. People may develop illusory correlations, which are inaccurate or overestimated associations between categories, especially when the information is distinctive. ^[2]

Propose to add to the section Modification: "New information that falls within an individual's schema is easily remembered and incorporated into their worldview. However, when new information is perceived that does not fit a schema, many things can happen. The most common reaction is to simply ignore or quickly forget the new information. This can happen on an unconscious level— frequently an individual may not even perceive the new information. People may also interpret the new information in a way that minimizes how much they must change their schemata. For example, Bob thinks that chickens don't lay eggs. He then sees a chicken laying an egg. Instead of changing the part of his schema that says "chickens don't lay eggs", he is likely to adopt the belief that the animal in question that he has just seen laying an egg is not a real chicken. This is an example of disconfirmation bias, the tendency to set higher standards for evidence that contradicts one's expectations. However, when the new information cannot be ignored, existing schemata must be changed or new schemata must be created (accommodation). In view of this, a person's new schemata may be an expansion of the schemata into a subtype. This allows for the information to be incorporated into existing beliefs without contradicting them. An example in social psychology would be the combination of a person's beliefs about women and their beliefs about business. If women are not generally perceived to be in business, but the person meets one who is, a new subtype of businesswoman may be created, and the information perceived will be incorporated into this subtype. Activation of either woman or business schema may then make further available the schema of "businesswoman". This also allows for previous beliefs about women or those in business to persist. Rather than modifying the schemata related to women or to businesspersons, the subtype is its own category. ^[2]

Schemata have also been viewed from a sociocultural perspective with contributions from Lev Vygotsky, in which there is a transactional relationship between the development of a schema and the environment that influences it, such that the schema doesn't develop independently as a construct in the mind, but carries all the aspects of the history, social, and cultural meaning which influences its development. Schemata are not just scripts or frameworks to be called upon, but are active processes for solving problems and interacting with the world. ^[3]