このエントリーをはてなブックマークに追加
ID 27171
file
title alternative
Ecological validity of everyday memory research
creator
subject
everyday memory
ecological validity
autobiographical memory
eyewitness testimony
flashbulb memory
action slip
NDC
Psychology
Education
abstract
Comments on the debate between researchers who advocate laboratory-based and naturalistic study of memory, as to the relative merits and demerits of the two approaches, were presented. To evaluate the validity of Banaji and Crowder's (1989) claim that the naturalistic study of memory has been unscientific, unprofitable, and favoring the use of ecologically valid methods at the expence of generalization of results, four significant lines of everyday memory studies were reviewed and discussed: studies of autobiographical memory, studies of eyewitness testimony, studies of flashbulb memory, and studies of action slip. By evaluating the value of everyday memory research as compared with that of laboratory-based memory research, it was concluded that attempts to further progress in the study of human memory should try to integrate rather than alienate different approaches to human memory.
journal title
Bulletin of the Faculty of Education, Hiroshima University. Part 1, Psychology division
issue
Issue 41
start page
123
end page
130
date of issued
1993-02-10
publisher
広島大学教育学部
issn
0919-8652
ncid
SelfDOI
language
jpn
nii type
Departmental Bulletin Paper
HU type
Departmental Bulletin Papers
DCMI type
text
format
application/pdf
text version
publisher
department
Graduate School of Education
他の一覧