Natural Settings, Memory In
The study of memory as it is used in natural settings is now an accepted part of the scientific study of memory, engaging the attention of many researchers. This is a relatively new development; the classical study of memory took little interest in naturalistic studies. In the century between 1880 and 1980, an emphasis on experimental control led most experimenters to use specially prepared tasks and materials in their work, even if—as often happened—those tasks seemed meaningless to their subjects. The study of memory in natural settings was largely ignored.
Early Research
Two important exceptions to this trend are worth mentioning: eyewitness testimony and memory for stories. In the early 1900s, William Stern established a journal (Beitrage zur Psychologie der Aussage) devoted entirely to the study of testimony. In his experiments, Stern staged unexpected or dramatic events in the presence of groups of people who were then interrogated as if they had witnessed a real crime. Such testimony is surprisingly unreliable. Witnesses often give highly confabulated accounts of the event itself and are rarely able to describe the "criminals." Confidence is no guarantee of accuracy in such reports. Modern research confirms that eyewitnesses may be entirely wrong even when they are quite sure they are right.
This page contains 201 words.
Natural Settings, Memory In article
Read the rest of this article.
This article contains 1,705 words
(approx. 6 pages at 300 words per page).
Order our Memory Article
