Person Memory the Processing of Consistent and Inconsistent Person Information

Hemsley, Gordon D.; Marmurek, Harvey H. C.

doi:10.1177/0146167282083007

Cited by 82 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding may be similar to the congruency effect in person memory experiments (Hastie, 1980;Srull, 1981;Srull et aI., 1985): Subjects remember behaviors that are incongruent with expectations better than they remember behaviors that are congruent. The incongruency effect presumably results from more processing of the incongruent behaviors, which are studied longer (Hemsley & Marmurek, 1982). If the present effect is similar to this person memory effect, then longer study times should occur for unexpected than for expected details.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…Therefore, recall of incongruent behaviors is higher than recall of congruent behaviors. Further support for this model can be seen in a study by Hemsley and Marmurek (1982), who showed that incongruent behaviors were studied longer than congruent ones in conditions that produced higher recall of incongruent behaviors. Although Srull and Wyer (1989) have recently specified the situations in which incongruent behaviors will be recalled better and the situations in which they will not, the newer model still postulates better recall of material that is incongruent with expectations.…”

Section: Models Of Relatedness and Memorymentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Memory for script actions: Effects of relevance and detail expectancy

Maki

1990

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Script actions that varied both in relevance to the script and in the expectancy of their details were developed. In Experiment 1, recall of these actions was tested. Actions of medium relevance were recalled better than actions of high or low relevance, whether or not details were presented. However, the unexpected details themselves were recalled better than the expected details. In Experiment 2, recognition was lowest for high-relevance actions but medium-and low-relevance actions did not differ. Actions with unexpected details were recognized better than actions with expected details, which tended to be better than generic actions. The results were interpreted as showing that both the relevance and the expectancy of the details in script actions are important in memory, but that the two dimensions may play different roles.Many studies have shown that prior knowledge affects the processing of new material-that schemata are used to comprehend and organize integrated material (Mandler, 1984;Taylor & Crocker, 1981). Generally, information important to an activated schema is remembered better than information less important (Johnson, 1970); however, other findings appear to conflict with this generalization. Using scripts, which are highly schematized sets of actions, Graesser, Woll, Kowalski, and Smith (1980) found that actions that were highly typical, and presumably important, were recalled and recognized more poorly than actions that were less typical. In person memory experiments, Hastie (1980) and Srull (1981;Srull, Lichtenstein, & Rothbart, 1985;Srull & Wyer, 1989) found that behaviors incongruent with trait expectations were recalled better than behaviors that were congruent. Thus, the literature on importance indicates that the more related material is to a schema, the better it will be remembered; but the script and person memory literatures seem to show the opposite.The purpose in the present experiments was to understand when relatedness to a schema helps memory and when it hurts memory. Relatedness was manipulated in two ways. First, relevance of actions to an activated script was varied with low-, medium-, and high-relevance actions. The main question for this variable was whether relevance would produce an inverted U-shaped function in recall and a negative linear function in recognition. Second, the expectancy of the details contained in those actions was varied. The main question here was whether both recall and recognition would be better for unexpected Appreciation is expressed to Kim Veum, Heidi Goos, Tom Tigue, and Nate Emerson for testing the subjects and scoring the data. Portions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, seattle, 1987. Requests for reprints should be sent to

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Models Of Relatedness and Memorymentioning

confidence: 85%

Memory for script actions: Effects of relevance and detail expectancy

Maki

1990

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Macrae, Bodenhausen, Schloerscheidt, and Milne (1999) have argued that when encoding counter-stereotypic information, a process of inconsistency resolution takes place, which requires executive cognitive resources (see also Hemsley & Marmurek, 1982). Macrae et al (1999) observed that concurrent performance on an executive task impaired ability to process counter-stereotypical information.…”

Section: Processing Novel Conjunctions What Processes Might Be Involmentioning

confidence: 99%

The formation of novel social category conjunctions in working memory: A possible role for the episodic buffer?

Hutter

Allen

Wood

2015

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recent research, however, has suggested that Hastie and Kumar's findings were an artifact of a confound between set size and expectancy. Researchers who have avoided this confound (e.g., Bargh & Thein, 1985;Hemsley & Marmurek, 1982) have found that people preferentially recall information that confirms well-formed beliefs (for further details, see Higgins & Bargh, 1987). tics of themselves and self-disconfirmatory feedback to the source of the feedback.…”

Section: Selective Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet.

Swann¹

1987

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

999

737

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article traces a program of research on the interplay between social thought and social interaction. Early investigations of the impact of perceivers' expectancies on the actions of target individuals illuminated the contribution of perceivers to the identity negotiation process but overlooked the role of targets. The research discussed here is based on the assumption that targets play an active role in the identity negotiation process. Specifically, just as perceivers strive to validate their expectancies, targets seek to verify their self-views. The nature and antecedents of the processes through which people verify their self-conceptions as well as the relationship of these activities to self-concept change and self-enhancement processes are discussed. This research suggests that perceivers and targets enter their interactions with independent and sometimes conflicting agendas that are resolved through a process of identity negotiation. The identity negotiation process therefore provides a theoretical context in which the interplay between other-perception and self-perception can be understood.A little over a decade ago, Mark Snyder and I became interested in the self-fulfilling nature of social beliefs. We were particularly interested in behavioral confirmation, a process whereby the expectancies of some individuals (perceivers) channel social interaction so as to cause the behavior of other individuals (targets) to confirm perceivers' expectancies. In our research, for example,

show abstract

Person Memory the Processing of Consistent and Inconsistent Person Information

Cited by 82 publications

References 9 publications

Memory for script actions: Effects of relevance and detail expectancy

Memory for script actions: Effects of relevance and detail expectancy

The formation of novel social category conjunctions in working memory: A possible role for the episodic buffer?

Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About