("This could be. . . ") or with absolute language ("This is . . .") and asked the students to remember
them. Tests of recall and recognition of the objects in a new
context revealed that conditional learning resulted in better
memory.
For her thesis, Janet Eck tested the effects of memorization
in a medical setting." Because of the volume of information to
be learned in medical school, medical students memorize more
than do most of us. She hypothesized that when called on later
to use that information in a somewhat novel context, students
would overlook possible alternative views. She examined the
diagnosis of diseases that were uncommon in women until
recently. Since the vast majority of medical information has
been deduced from the conditions in 150-to-170-pound white
males, she wondered whether male doctors would be more
likely than female doctors, who would be more familiar with
the perspective of a female patient, to diagnose incorrectly a
disease more common to men than to women. Male and
female patients presented symptoms of medical ailments prevalent in women or prevalent in men. Male and female physicians
were asked for their diagnoses. Not surprisingly, Eck found
that the unusual syndromes, the ones not likely to have been
memorized, went unnoticed and thus were misdiagnosed. In
addition, women who presented signs of having had a transient
ischemic attack or lung cancer were more likely to be misdiag nosed by male physicians than by female physicians, for whom
the perspective was less unusual.
Information learned in an absolute form can be memorized. It remains still with each repetition, regardless of context
and perspective. When we are told that something "could be,"
we understand immediately that it also could not be, or could
be something else. When we teach important information,
information about health, how to pilot an airplane, air-traffic
control, bridge or building safety, and so on, we need to allow
for exceptions, for information that goes beyond these common
instances that appear to be all that is relevant at the time of initial learning. Students learning such information must be open
to factors that could operate in a new context. If we simply
memorize the known past, we are not preparing ourselves for
the as-yet-to-be-known future.
Had Hansel and Gretel noticed more of their surroundings-how one tree differed from another, how the ground
beneath them changed with the growth covering it, the odd
rock or boulder strewn in the path-they would have had an
easier journey home. In their case, as in many cases, memorization was impossible, but a mindful scan of the surroundings (in
the forest, on the chessboard, at a party) will often help us navigate successfully.
Psalms
Luis LLORENS TORRES
Especially as we age, we worry about forgetting much of what we have known. What
would life be like if we remembered everything we once knew? Would I notice how you
looked today if I kept before me clear pictures of how you
looked every other time I saw you? Would I be inclined to
listen to you if you said something at all similar to something
else you once told me and I remembered every word you
said? Would I taste the food I'm eating if I simultaneously remembered exactly how it tasted the last time? Wouldn't it
be easier (more guilt free) to eat pasta, now considered
healthy, if I did not remember that I was first taught that it
was fattening? Would I even consider having another baby if
the pain of every minute of the last delivery were still perfectly vivid?
A certain degree of memory is a necessary protection. We
avoid touching hot stoves. A recollection that winters in New
England can be cold is probably sufficient to lead one to buy a
warm coat. To remember every sensation we felt when the temperature fell below zero and the winds reached sixty miles per
hour, however, is probably unnecessary. There are clear advantages to forgetting bad