Discuss schema theory in relation to cognitive processing.

Refer to the paper 1 section B assessment criteria when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

The command term “discuss” asks candidates to offer a considered review of how schema theory contributes to an understanding of cognitive processing.

Psychological studies investigating schema theory include but are not limited to:

• Anderson and Pichert’s (1978) study on the effect of schema processing on memory encoding and retrieval
• Bartlett’s (1932) schema processing as part of reconstructive memory
• Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) study on reconstructive memory
• Brewer and Treyens’s (1981) study on the role of office schemas on recall
• Bransford and Johnson’s (1972) study on contextual conditions for encoding and recall.

Critical discussion points may include, but are not limited to:

• applications of schema theory – for example, CBT. It is a robust theory that has many applications across many fields of psychology
• implications of the findings in our understanding of cognitive processing
• the inability to observe schema: Cohen (1993) argued that the concept of schema is too vague and hypothetical to be useful
• methodological considerations.

HL:

There were several strong responses to this question, demonstrating a good understanding of research into schema theory and its role in explaining memory or thinking and decision-making. However, many candidates struggled to explain the theory in any detail with regard to its role in cognition.

Weaker responses only evaluated research with little consideration of the theory itself. These responses also tended to have superficial critical thinking focused on ethical considerations or unsupported claims about the inability to generalize the findings.

SL:

Responses in this question were often formulaic and usually began with a simplistic explanation of schema theory or a basic description of related concepts. Many candidates spent unnecessary time discussing memory processes and unrelated models and/or research such as Atkinson and Shiffrin's multi-store model of memory and/or Yuille and Cutshall's research into the reliability of eyewitness testimony.

There was a good variety of research used in this response. Most candidates gave either Bartlett's 'War of the Ghosts' study or Piaget's research into schema theory as historical context, although these were not always described in-depth or accurately. Candidates then introduced one or more relevant studies: Loftus and Palmer, Brewer and Treyens, Anderson and Pichert, and Bransford and Johnson proved most popular.

The lack of well-described critical thinking was once again evident; many responses merely provided some simple evaluation statements of the research studies and ignored what schema theory tells us about cognitive processing.