What did Bartlett (1932) show about memory as reconstruction, and why is it the classic evidence for the cognitive approach?
Classic research for the cognitive approach: Bartlett (1932), War of the Ghosts (reconstructive memory and schemas). Aim, method, results, conclusions and evaluation.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the classic cognitive research, Bartlett (1932), War of the Ghosts. Covers the aim, the repeated and serial reproduction method, how recall was distorted by schemas, the conclusion that memory is reconstructive, and a balanced evaluation.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
Bartlett (1932), War of the Ghosts, is the classic research evidence for the cognitive approach in Component 1. You must know its aim, method, results and conclusions, evaluate it, and explain how it supports the cognitive assumption that memory is reconstructive and shaped by schemas.
The answer
Aim and method
Results and conclusions
Evaluation
- Ecological validity. Recalling a story resembles everyday memory more than memorising nonsense syllables.
- Foundational and applied. Established reconstructive memory and schema theory, with applications to eyewitness testimony.
- Lack of control. Instructions on how accurately to recall were not standardised.
- Subjective scoring. Judging what counts as a "distortion" was subjective, lowering reliability.
- Generalisability and replication. The artificial, unfamiliar story may not represent all memory, and schema effects do not always replicate cleanly.
Examples in context
Example 1. Why this anchors the cognitive approach. The study directly supports the cognitive assumptions that internal mental processes (here, schemas) actively shape behaviour and that information is processed, not simply recorded. Memory as reconstruction is a core cognitive idea, which is why Eduqas uses Bartlett as the classic evidence for the cognitive approach.
Example 2. The link to eyewitness testimony. If schemas distort recall, eyewitness memory can be unreliable, which connects directly to the cognitive contemporary debate on the reliability of eyewitness testimony and to applied work on interviewing. Bartlett provides the theoretical foundation for why witnesses misremember.
Try this
Q1. Name the two reproduction techniques Bartlett used. [2 marks]
- Cue. Repeated reproduction (one person recalls the story several times) and serial reproduction (the story is passed from person to person).
Q2. Explain what is meant by reconstructive memory. [2 marks]
- Cue. Memory is not a passive, exact recording but an active rebuilding of events, in which schemas fill gaps and reshape details to fit prior knowledge and expectations.
Q3. State one weakness of Bartlett's study. [2 marks]
- Cue. The procedure lacked control (recall instructions were not standardised) and scoring distortions was subjective, lowering reliability; or the unfamiliar story may not represent all memory.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of WJEC Eduqas exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Eduqas 20188 marksDescribe the method and results of Bartlett's (1932) War of the Ghosts study. [8 marks]Show worked answer →
A description item testing method and results (AO1).
Method: a laboratory experiment using "War of the Ghosts", an unfamiliar Native American folk tale. Participants read the story and then recalled it after various delays. Bartlett used two techniques: repeated reproduction (the same participant recalls the story several times over days, weeks or months) and serial reproduction (the story is passed from one person to the next, like a rumour chain).
Results: recall became shorter, and the story was distorted to fit the participants' own cultural expectations (schemas). Unfamiliar details were omitted or changed (for example "canoes" became "boats", "hunting seals" became "fishing"), the story became more conventional and rational, and the supernatural elements were rationalised away. These distortions increased with each reproduction.
Markers reward the unfamiliar story, the repeated and serial reproduction techniques, and the schema-driven distortions (omission, transformation, rationalisation).
Eduqas 202112 marksEvaluate Bartlett's (1932) study. [12 marks]Show worked answer →
A balanced evaluation (AO3) reaching a judgement.
Strengths: it has high ecological validity for everyday memory, because recalling a story is more like real remembering than memorising nonsense syllables; and it gave foundational support for the idea that memory is reconstructive and guided by schemas, a central cognitive concept with real applications (for example eyewitness testimony).
Weaknesses: the procedure lacked control - instructions on how accurately to recall were not standardised, and the scoring of "distortions" was subjective, lowering reliability; the unfamiliar, artificial story may not represent all memory; and findings about schema effects have not always replicated cleanly.
A strong answer concludes that the study is a landmark demonstration of reconstructive memory with strong real-world relevance but is methodologically loose and subjective. Markers reward developed points with a judgement.
Related dot points
- The cognitive approach: assumptions (information processing/computer analogy, internal mental processes, schemas), the named therapy (cognitive behavioural therapy), application to behaviour, and evaluation. AS content.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the cognitive approach in Component 1. Covers the assumptions (the computer analogy, internal mental processes and schemas), cognitive behavioural therapy as the named treatment, applications to behaviour, and a balanced evaluation for the Past to Present paper.
- Classic research for the biological approach: Raine et al. (1997), Brain abnormalities in murderers indicated by positron emission tomography. Aim, method, results, conclusions and evaluation.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the classic biological research, Raine et al. (1997), on brain abnormalities in murderers using PET scans. Covers the aim, the quasi-experiment with NGRI participants, the PET findings, conclusions about brain dysfunction and violence, and a balanced evaluation.
- Classic research for the behaviourist approach: Watson and Rayner (1920), Conditioned emotional reactions (Little Albert). Aim, method, results, conclusions and evaluation.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the classic behaviourist research, Watson and Rayner (1920), the Little Albert study. Covers the aim, the controlled procedure that conditioned a fear response, generalisation, the conclusions about learned emotion, and a balanced evaluation including the ethical issues.
- Classic research for the psychodynamic approach: Freud (1909), Analysis of a phobia in a five-year-old boy (Little Hans). Aim, method, results, conclusions and evaluation.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the classic psychodynamic research, Freud's (1909) case study of Little Hans. Covers the aim, the case-study method via the boy's father, the horse phobia, the Oedipal interpretation, the conclusions about psychosexual development, and a balanced evaluation.
- Classic research for the positive approach: Myers and Diener (1995), Who is happy? Aim, method (review of subjective wellbeing research), results, conclusions and evaluation.
An Eduqas A-Level Psychology answer to the classic positive-psychology research, Myers and Diener (1995), Who is happy? Covers the aim, the review of subjective wellbeing evidence, the findings on what does and does not predict happiness, the conclusions, and a balanced evaluation.
Sources & how we know this
- Eduqas GCE A Level in Psychology (A290) specification — Eduqas (2015)