Testing a Hierarchical Model of Self-Knowledge

Schell, Terry L.; Klein, Stanley A.; Babey, Susan H.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00351.x

Cited by 74 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the scope hypothesis predicts, retrieving a trait summary primed trait-inconsistent episodes but not traitconsistent ones. This was not the case in other decision contexts: Asking a subject to simply define a trait-a context that does not cause retrieval of a trait summary (Klein et al, 1989Klein & Loftus, 1993b;Klein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Schell et al, 1996)-primes neither trait-consistent nor trait-inconsistent episodes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the behavioral evidence grows, judgments are increasingly made by accessing an emerging trait summary and decreasingly by accessing relevant episodes. When the amount of experience is high, the semantic summary is well developed, and trait judgments are made by accessing this knowledge (e.g., Klein et al, 1997;Klein & Loftus, 1990Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Schell et al, 1996). This process is faster than retrieving and considering individual instances (e.g., Klein et al, 1989Klein et al, , 1997Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Sherman & Klein, 1994), and it bypasses and inhibits this other judgment route (e.g., Klein & Loftus, 1993b, 1993cKlein, Sherman, & Loftus, 1996;Sherman & Klein, 1994).…”

Section: When Are Trait Summaries Formed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klein and Loftus and their colleagues recently proposed and tested a model of the relation between memories of personal experiences and trait conceptions of self (e.g., Klein et al, 1989Klein et al, , 1997Klein et al, , 1999Klein & Loftus, 1990, 1993cKlein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992;Klein, Loftus, & Sherman, 1993;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Klein, Sherman, & Loftus, 1996;Kihlstrom & Klein, 1994Schell et al, 1996). Their model incorporated the following three features.…”

Section: The Evidence For Independencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…There now is ample evidence that people form summary representations of their own personality traits and retrieve these when asked to decide whether a particular trait describes them (e.g., Craik et al, 1999;Hirshman & Lanning, 1999;Kircher et al, 2000;Klein et al, 1989Klein et al, , 1993Klein et al, , 1997Klein et al, , 1999Klein & Loftus, 1990Klein, Loftus, & Kihlstrom, 1996;Klein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Lord, 1993;Schell et al, 1996). Equally important, a large body of evidence shows that people maintain detailed stores of behavioral episodes they have experienced (e.g., Barclay, 1996;Conway & Bekerian, 1987;Klein et al, 1989Klein et al, , 1997Klein & Loftus, 1993b;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Nelson, 1993bNelson, , 1996Rubin, 1986;Singer & Salovey, 1993;Strauman, 1990).…”

Section: The Evidence For Independencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We examine below the relation among episodic memory, semantic memory, and a particular type of categorization/decision process-judgments of one's own traits (e.g., Kihlstrom & Klein, 1994Klein & Loftus, 1990Klein, Babey, & Sherman, 1997;Klein, Loftus, & Burton, 1989;Klein, Loftus, & Kihlstrom, 1996;Klein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;Klein, Sherman, & Loftus, 1996;Lord, 1993;Schell, Klein, & Babey, 1996). For example, when someone asks, "Are you kind?"…”

Section: Judging Oneselfmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions.

Klein

Cosmides

Tooby

et al. 2002

Psychological Review

Self Cite

397

372

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Memory evolved to supply useful, timely information to the organism's decision-making systems. Therefore, decision rules, multiple memory systems, and the search engines that link them should have coevolved to mesh in a coadapted, functionally interlocking way. This adaptationist perspective suggested the scope hypothesis: When a generalization is retrieved from semantic memory, episodic memories that are inconsistent with it should be retrieved in tandem to place boundary conditions on the scope of the generalization. Using a priming paradigm and a decision task involving person memory, the authors tested and confirmed this hypothesis. The results support the view that priming is an evolved adaptation. They further show that dissociations between memory systems are not-and should not be-absolute: Independence exists for some tasks but not others.Memory is a gift of nature, the ability of living organisms to retain and to utilize acquired information or knowledge. . . . Owners of biological memory systems are capable of behaving more appropriately at a later time because of their experiences at an earlier time, a feat not possible for organisms without memory. (Tulving, 1995a, p. 751) If there is one proposition on which all psychologists seem to agree, it is that memory is useful. Memory allows organisms to adjust their behavior on the basis of information they acquire ontogenetically, through their experiences with the world.This connection between personal experience, memory, and behavior implies a close relationship between learning and memory: "Memory in biological systems always entails learning (the acquisition of information) and . . . learning implies retention (memory) of such information" (Tulving, 1995a, p. 751). Recognizing this, psychologists have long exploited learning paradigms to study the properties of memory (e.g., by list learning to probe free recall, cued recall, and recognition).The same connection also implies a close relationship between decision rules 1 and memory. An organism cannot behave "more appropriately"-that is, more adaptively-at a later time because of experiences at an earlier time unless it is equipped with rules that use ontogenetically acquired information to make decisions. Indeed, memory systems must have evolved their structure in response to the informational needs of the decision rules guiding behavior. This is because memory properties that have no impact on an organism's decisions will not be visible to-and hence will not be shaped by-selection. Moreover, because decision rules often differ in what information they require, different sets of decision rules may activate different retrieval processes or search engines and may access different memory systems or sets of memory systems. Without engines that can search for and retrieve the right information, supplying it to the right decision rule at the right time, an organ designed to store ontogenetically acquired information-that is, a memory system-would be a pointless appendage. Hence, adaptive behavior over tim...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: When Are Trait Summaries Formed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Evidence For Independencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Evidence For Independencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Judging Oneselfmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions.

Klein

Cosmides

Tooby

et al. 2002

Psychological Review

Self Cite

397

372

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Automatic and Controlled Processes in Behavioural Control: Implications for Personality Psychology

Corr

2010

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper highlights a number of unresolved theoretical issues that, it is argued, continue to impede the construction of a viable model of behavioural control in personality psychology. It is contended that, in order to integrate motivation, emotion, cognition and conscious experience within a coherent framework, two major issues need to be recognised: (a) the relationship between automatic (reflexive) and controlled (reflective) processing and (b) the lateness of controlled processing (including the generation of conscious awareness)-phenomenally, such processing seems to 'control' behaviour, but experimentally it can be shown to postdate the behaviour it represents. The implications of these two major issues are outlined, centred on the need to integrate theoretical perspectives within personality psychology, as well as the greater unification of personality psychology with general psychology. A model of behavioural control is sketched, formulated around the concept of the behavioural inhibition system (BIS), which accounts for: (a) why certain stimuli are extracted for controlled processing (i.e. those that are not 'going to plan', as detected by an error mechanism) and (b) the function of controlled processing (including conscious awareness) in terms of adjusting the cybernetic weights of automatic processes (which are always in control of immediate behaviour) which, then, influence future automatically controlled behaviour. The relevance of this model is illustrated in relation to a number of topics in personality psychology, as well related issues of free-will and difficult-to-control behaviours.Johnson, and Joormann (2008) note, studies from cognitive, social, personality and development psychology converge on the conclusion that there exist (at least) two modes of information processing and action regulation, which operate simultaneously and often in competition with each other. The interplay of these mechanisms may be especially important in accounting for individual variation in both normal and abnormal behaviour.This paper contends that psychology in general, and personality psychology in particular, has failed to grasp firmly enough the implications of multiple levels of behavioural control and, in consequence, theoretical advance and integration are being impeded. The aim of this paper is to highlight some of the problems that need to be recognised and addressed, and to invite commentary on a proposal for their resolution.Consideration of the importance of multiple levels of behavioural control requires the recognition of a number of key theoretical issues; namely (a) the relationship between automatic (reflexive-non-conscious) and controlled (reflective, often with conscious representation) processes and (b) the lateness of controlled processes (including the generation of conscious awareness)-phenomenally, such processes seem to 'control' behaviour, but experimentally they can be shown to postdate the behaviour they represent. This paper is primarily concerned with behavioural control; however, i...

show abstract

Intergroup Bias in Group Judgment Processes: The Role of Behavioral Memories

Sherman¹,

Klein

Laskey

et al. 1998

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments examined the role of memory for behavioral episodes in judgments about in-groups and out-groups. Using a minimal group paradigm, participants read either positive or negative trait-relevant behaviors performed by group members. They then were asked to make judgments about the group's trait characteristics. Results demonstrated that, for groups described positively, judgments about the out-group but not the in-group were accomplished by retrieving from memory specific behaviors performed by group members. In contrast, for groups described negatively, judgments about the in-group but not the out-group were accomplished by retrieving specific behaviors performed by group members. These results suggest that basic differences in the way judgments about in-groups and out-groups are made contribute to the establishment and perpetuation of intergroup bias by decreasing the stability of negative in-group and positive out-group impressions and increasing the stability of positive in-group and negative out-group impressions. 1998Academic Press

show abstract

Testing a Hierarchical Model of Self-Knowledge

Cited by 74 publications

References 11 publications

Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions.

Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions.

Automatic and Controlled Processes in Behavioural Control: Implications for Personality Psychology

Intergroup Bias in Group Judgment Processes: The Role of Behavioral Memories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About