The Role of Familiarity and Stereotypes in Recall Memory for Environments: a Comparison of Children and Adults
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Role of Familiarity and Stereotypes in Recall Memory for Environments: A comparison of Children and Adults by Kaila Bruer A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology Carleton University Ottawa, Canada ©2012 Kaila Bruer Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du 1+1 Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-93571-2 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-93571-2 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada CHILDREN’S RECALL MEMORY FOR PLACES ii Abstract The purpose of the study was to investigate whether familiarity with types of environments and stereotypes about these environments influenced the quantity, accuracy, and errors recalled by children (4- to 6- year-olds) and adults. Using images and open recall questions, results revealed that environment familiarity resulted in increased quantity and accuracy of children’s recall, but also resulted in more memory errors. Familiarity was also related to an increase in recall for adults, but it did not influence accuracy. Familiarity appears to affect children and adults’ reporting of memory errors in different ways. Adults made relevant errors, suggesting that they are ‘filling in the gaps’ using semantic connections to recall information; whereas children’s errors were less relevant to the environment and, thus, are not likely based on semantics, but instead, may be related to social pressure to report information. These findings are discussed within the context of fuzzy trace theory and semantic knowledge structures and implications for the applied eyewitness context are examined. CHILDREN’S RECALL MEMORY FOR PLACES iii Acknowledgements Like any research project, there are many people involved and, without their amazing support and feedback, this study could not have been brought to a successful conclusion. I was most fortunate to have had a supervisor, Dr. Joanna Pozzulo, whose support, encouragement, and feedback was integral to the successful completion of this research. I am indebted to her for the many hours spent discussing this research! I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Shelley Brown, Dr. Deepthi Kamawar, and Dr. Ron Saunders for their guidance and support throughout this research project. Also, a special thanks to the school principals, teachers, parents and children who collaborated in this research as well as my research team. Without them, this study would not have been possible. To my colleagues and friends, thank you for the many hours editing, discussing, and simply listening to me talk about my study! In addition, I am most grateful for my family who have always provided me with the support, love, and encouragement along the way. CHILDREN’S RECALL MEMORY FOR PLACES iv Table of Contents Abstract...................................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................................iii List of Tables....................................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures .....................................................................................................................................vii List of Appendices............................................................................................................................ viii Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 1 Eyewitness Recall Memory and Age..................................................................................................4 Quantitative Recall Performance.....................................................................................................5 Accuracy of Recall ............................................................................................................................5 Memory for Objects..............................................................................................................................7 Memory Errors.......................................................................................................................................8 Errors of commission........................................................................................................................9 Semantic Knowledge Structures: Schemas...................................................................................... 10 Stereotypes...........................................................................................................................................13 Familiarity............................................................................................................................................18 Fuzzy Trace Theory ............................................................................................................................26 Overview of the Present Study......................................................................................................... 32 Hypotheses...........................................................................................................................................32 Method..................................................................................................................................................... 34 Results ...................................................................................................................................................... 38 Pilot...................................................................................................................................................... 40 Main Study.......................................................................................................................................... 43 Quantity of Information Recalled..................................................................................................... 50 Accuracy of Information Recalled.................................................................................................... 55 CHILDREN’S RECALL MEMORY FOR PLACES v Memory Errors.................................................................................................................................... 57 Memory Errors: Relevant versus Irrelevant..................................................................................... 59 Discussion................................................................................................................................................62 References................................................................................................................................................ 80 CHILDREN5 S RECALL MEMORY FOR PLACES vi List of Tables Table 1. Pilot: Frequency reported visits to environment.................................................................. 42 Table 2. Frequency reported visits to environment............................................................................ 45 Table 3. Inter-rater Reliability Scores...................................................................................................48 Table 4. Quantity, Accuracy, and Errors by Age and Picture............................................................53 Table 5. Quantity, Accuracy, and Errors by Age and Condition.......................................................55 Table 6. Relevant and Irrelevant Errors by Age and Image.............................................................. 61 CHILDREN’S RECALL