Schema use and Development

People tend to use a basic-level of categorisation of neither too inclusive nor too exclusive by accessing subtypes, social stereotypes and role schemas (e.g. doctor). Other influences include:

• Observable features (e.g. physical appearance)
• Contextually distinctive (e.g. a female amongst a group of males)
• Use schemas based on earlier information (primacy effect)
• Accessibile schemas such as those commonly used and;
• Schemas which have a personal importance

These theory-driven schemas are appropriate and accurate enough for a majority of the time, however a data-driven approach is taken on when the costs of being wrong are increased (e.g. responsibility, rewards and punishments). This is when individuals collect more information in order to create a more accurate schema. Individuals are more likely to rely on schemas when:

• Time is scarce
• Highly distracted and;
• Anxious

Subjective importance of schemas and accessibility are major influences of the degree and type of schema used. Other influences include:

• Attributional complexity (individuals vary in the complexity and the number of explanations of other people)
• Uncertainty orientation (individuals vary in the amount of information they want and may prefer to be uninformed)
• Need for cognition (the variance in the amount that individuals think about things)
• Cognitive complexity (the variance in individual complexity of cognitive processes and representations)

The acquisition and development of schemas

• The more encounters experience the more abstract they become
• They become more complex
• As the complexity increases so do the links between schematic elements
• As the schema grows, it becomes well organised and easier to access
• They become more resilient, incorporating a broader variety and understanding its inclusiveness
• They should then become more accurate and assist to better understanding the social world
• Although schemas tend to be slow to change, if a schema has been greatly inaccurate a major subjective experience has the ability to change the schema dramatically

Three process suggested by Rothbart (1981) of schema change are:

1. Bookkeeping (a slow and gradual change brought on by new evidence)
2. Conversion (information in contrast to the schema is slowly acquired that the schema can no longer be sustained, a sudden change to the schema occurs)
3. Subtyping (inconsistent information changes the structure of the schema causing the formation of subcategories, e.g. the change from all apples are red to apples can be both red or green)