^BBSnline

MEMORY METAPHORS AND THE LABORATORY/REAL-LIFE CONTROVERSY: CORRESPONDENCE VERSUS STOREHOUSE VIEWS OF MEMORY

Koriat, Asher and Goldsmith, Morris (1996) MEMORY METAPHORS AND THE LABORATORY/REAL-LIFE CONTROVERSY: CORRESPONDENCE VERSUS STOREHOUSE VIEWS OF MEMORY.

Short Abstract:

The study of memory is witnessing a spirited clash between proponents of traditional laboratory research and those advocating a more naturalistic approach to the study of "everyday" memory. The debate has generally centered on the "what" (content), "where" (context), and "how" (methods) of memory research. In the present target article, we argue that this controversy discloses a further, more fundamental breach between two underlying memory metaphors, each having distinct implications for memory theory and assessment: Whereas traditional memory research has been dominated by the storehouse metaphor, leading to a focus on the quantity of items remaining in store, the recent wave of everyday memory research discloses a shift towards a correspondence metaphor, focusing on the accuracy or faithfulness of memory in representing past events. Our analysis shows the correspondence metaphor to call for a research approach which differs from the traditional approach in important respects: in emphasizing the intentional-representational function of memory, in addressing the wholistic and graded aspects of memory correspondence, in taking an output-bound assessment perspective, and in allowing more room for the operation of subject-controlled metamemory processes and motivational factors. This analysis can help tie together some of the what, where, and how aspects of the everyday-laboratory controversy. More importantly, in explicating the unique metatheoretical foundation of the accuracy-oriented approach to memory, our aim is to promote a more effective exploitation of the correspondence metaphor in both naturalistic and laboratory research contexts.

Long Abstract:

The study of memory is witnessing a spirited clash between proponents of traditional laboratory research and those advocating a more naturalistic approach to the study of "everyday" memory. The debate has generally centered on the "what" (content), "where" (context), and "how" (methods) of memory research. In the present target article, we argue that this controversy discloses a further, more fundamental breach between two underlying memory metaphors, each having distinct implications for memory theory and assessment: Whereas traditional memory research has been dominated by the storehouse metaphor, leading to a focus on the quantity of items remaining in store, the recent wave of everyday memory research discloses a shift towards a correspondence metaphor, focusing on the accuracy or faithfulness of memory in representing past events. Our analysis shows the correspondence metaphor to call for a research approach which differs from the traditional approach in important respects: in emphasizing the intentional-representational function of memory, in addressing the wholistic and graded aspects of memory correspondence, in taking an output-bound assessment perspective, and in allowing more room for the operation of subject-controlled metamemory processes and motivational factors. This analysis can help tie together some of the what, where, and how aspects of the everyday-laboratory controversy. More importantly, in explicating the unique metatheoretical foundation of the accuracy-oriented approach to memory, our aim is to promote a more effective exploitation of the correspondence metaphor in both naturalistic and laboratory research contexts.

Keywords:	accuracy, assessment, capacity ecological validity, intentionality, memory, metamemory, metaphors, monitoring, representation, storehouse, subject control.
Subjects:	Psychology: Cognitive Psychology Psychology: Learning and Memory
ID code:	bbs00000530
Deposited by:	Asher Koriat on 02 May 2001