↓ Skip to main content

Mental Schemas Hamper Memory Storage of Goal-Irrelevant Information

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mental Schemas Hamper Memory Storage of Goal-Irrelevant Information
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00629
Pubmed ID
Authors

C C G Sweegers, G A Coleman, E A M van Poppel, R Cox, L M Talamini

Abstract

Mental schemas exert top-down control on information processing, for instance by facilitating the storage of schema-related information. However, given capacity-limits and competition in neural network processing, schemas may additionally exert their effects by suppressing information with low momentary relevance. In particular, when existing schemas suffice to guide goal-directed behavior, this may actually reduce encoding of the redundant sensory input, in favor of gaining efficiency in task performance. The present experiment set out to test this schema-induced shallow encoding hypothesis. Our approach involved a memory task in which faces had to be coupled to homes. For half of the faces the responses could be guided by a pre-learned schema, for the other half of the faces such a schema was not available. Memory storage was compared between schema-congruent and schema-incongruent items. To characterize putative schema effects, memory was assessed both with regard to visual details and contextual aspects of each item. The depth of encoding was also assessed through an objective neural measure: the parietal old/new ERP effect. This ERP effect, observed between 500-800 ms post-stimulus onset, is thought to reflect the extent of recollection: the retrieval of a vivid memory, including various contextual details from the learning episode. We found that schema-congruency induced substantial impairments in item memory and even larger ones in context memory. Furthermore, the parietal old/new ERP effect indicated higher recollection for the schema-incongruent than the schema-congruent memories. The combined findings indicate that, when goals can be achieved using existing schemas, this can hinder the in-depth processing of novel input, impairing the formation of perceptually detailed and contextually rich memory traces. Taking into account both current and previous findings, we suggest that schemas can both positively and negatively bias the processing of sensory input. An important determinant in this matter is likely related to momentary goals, such that mental schemas facilitate memory processing of goal-relevant input, but suppress processing of goal-irrelevant information. - Schema-congruent information suffers from shallow encoding.- Schema congruency induces poor item and context memory.- The parietal old/new effect is less pronounced for schema-congruent items.- Schemas exert different influences on memory formation depending on current goals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Ghana 1 1%
Unknown 72 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 49%
Neuroscience 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 13 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2015.
All research outputs
#12,744,018
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,495
of 7,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,580
of 387,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#71
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,154 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.