This week’s readings generated several questions that I figured would be addressed in further readings, but perhaps they would be difficult to answer in concrete terms. The chapters we read about Bartlett’s experimentation on reproduction were rather verbose, but I understood from his research that humans have a tendency to compartmentalize experiences based on generalized notions of how one thing has occurred in relation to another, and that this act of comparison inherently occurs in our minds whether we are conscious of it or not. This concept of interdependency was apparent throughout all of the readings, and it seems to transcend all aspects of memory; we cannot pin down why we remember what we remember to one single entity because our memories are not a product of any one specific cause. Every memory is both conditioned and conditioning. Although I feel that Bartlett’s experimentation might be a little dated, I think that his research does provide valid and relevant information. It seems that it is necessary to further personalize this type of experimentation; I think it would be interesting to test an individual’s reproduction based on events that were markedly traumatic or personally recognized as “memorable” after several years had passed since their occurrence. To be able to trace every correspondence that had an effect on the construction of this memory would be another endeavor entirely, and I’m not sure how one would go about it, but it would seem quite relevant.
After reading about Korsakoff’s syndrome in Schacter’s “Of Time and Autobiography” chapter, I contemplated the idea of long-term consolidation. How does writing down one’s personal experiences affect their recollection of these memories in the future? It would be interesting to test this question by studying subjects that write in personal journals or diaries on a daily basis (not simply college students that have been asked to write down a few notable things they did during the day and ask them to recall this information later). It would be especially remarkable to see how accurately subjects could recall their emotional versus physical actions and reactions. Schacter posits that “Memory consolidation during sleep is likely influenced by what we think about and talk about while awake” (88). This seems tangible, but does one action (thinking) have greater influence over another action (talking) in this type of memory consolidation? To what extent are the memories that we consolidate during sleep affected by these actions? And how does this relate to the dreams that we have? Sometimes I wake from dreams that are so vivid and feel so real that it is difficult for me to accept that they haven’t actually occurred.
The one thing I kept thinking about after reading Rubin’s chapter was the pattern of the novice hero. Although this may be a rhetorical statement, I’d like to know if it is possible to trace these patterns in all forms of media. Is there a pattern or generalized notion of how news is reported on television and in newspaper or magazine articles? Can we also trace plot patterns in various movies?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I like Nadia's idea of researching memories of traumatic personal experiences—however cruel it may end up being.
What I like about it is that it would take one further step out of the lab and into life. Though Shelby's and Catie's (and all of our) concern of the affect of the subject's awareness that he or she is a subject still remains. We would have to invent even more cruel ways of conducting these experiments. (For example: “detectives” arrive at the subject's house at intervals of 15 minutes, one day, one week, one month, and two and a half years—each time asking “We're still terribly sorry for your loss, ma'am. Could you please recount the horrific events of that tragic day just ONE MORE TIME for us? We're very near a point where we can finally put this case to rest...”) This also assumes that we have an original story to compare these reproductions to, that her first account or other eyewitnesses' accounts are completely accurate.
Well, the point is that it's hard to study things outside a lab setting and outside of methodical experiments, the existence of which are by nature somewhat transparent to the subject.
I thought it was amazing that Bartlett wrote, “for the most part I used exactly the type of material that we have to deal with in daily life.” Yes, I can't tell you how many times my friends, my teachers, my coworkers ask me to read a story twice at my normal reading speed, wait 15 minutes, and reproduce the story as accurately as possible.
However, there must be some middle ground. Maybe we can look to certain employment training settings where it is already stressed that remembering all of the new incoming information is important. New employees can be given “quizzes” as to their memory of certain data for the job. Ebbinghaus certainly wouldn't like this, as there are so many factors playing into the importance of remembering this information, and so there are many untraceable motivations and associations to deal with in this experiment. However, it would get us closer to Bartlett's dream of examining “daily life,” because there are untraceable motivations and associations in daily memory.
Post a Comment