User:AvianAquilla/Cultural schema theory

History
The development of the Cultural Schema theory stems from the history of the concept of a Schema as highlighted in this timeline:

Ancient Greece: The idea of schemas existing as ideal types in the mind dates back all the way back to Plato.

19th century: Immanuel Kant conceptualized the role of experiences in development of reason and developed the argument that reason is structured through forms of experience- coining the phrase "Act only according to the maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." This statement argues that one should act only in ways that are deemed universally moral and reasonable, both of which are dependent on an individuals experiences and development of reason and morality [10 ].

'''1920s: Jean Piaget's work on cognitive development in children furthered the research made toward cultural schemata theory. Piaget's theory proposed that children progress through four major stages of cognitive development: the sensorimotor stage, the preoperational stage, the concrete operational stage, and the formal operational stage. He argued that children actively construct their understanding of the world through their experiences and interactions with their environment [11 ].'''

'''1930s: Frederic Bartlett's research showed that memory is influenced by cultural and social factors. He found that people from different cultures and backgrounds often remember information differently based on their cultural norms and beliefs. Bartlett proposed that people use their schema, or mental frameworks, to organize and interpret new information based on their existing knowledge and expectations. He argued that people tend to remember information that is consistent with their schema, while distorting or forgetting information that is inconsistent with their schema [12 ].'''

Further research was done in the following years to develop what is now known as the Cultural Schema Theory.

How cultural schemas develop
'''Research reveals that schemas operate at many different levels. The experiences which are unique to individuals allow them to acquire personal schemas. Societal schemas may emerge from a group's collective knowledge and are represented across the minds in a society, enabling people to think as if they are one mind [4]. However, when one's cultural environment provides experiences to which every member of that culture is exposed, their experiences allow every member to acquire cultural schemas [5]. Cultural schemas are conceptual structures which enable individuals to store perceptual and conceptual information about their culture and interpret experiences and expressions through cultural lenses. If people are not equipped with the appropriate cultural schema, they may not be able to make sense of culturally unfamiliar situations [4].'''

When one interacts with members of the same culture frequently, or talks about certain information with them many times, cultural schemas are created and stored in one's brain. Subsequent similar instances cause the cultural schema to become more organized, abstract, and compact. As this occurs, communication becomes much easier. It is explained that experience is the force which creates cultural schemas [5]. As people have more experiences their developing cultural schemas become more tightly organized. The information not only becomes more complex, but more useful among members of a culture, alike or different. Beyond the cognitive activity of cultural schemas is the complex pattern which occurs in the brain.

Not all schemas are uniformly important. High-level schemas are internalized and emotionally salient; likewise, when a schema is only weakly related to a person's self it becomes emotionally empty and irrelevant. [3]

Further use and development of the theory
Cultural schema theory refers to cultural-specific knowledge that individuals possess about the world [6]. While the concept of cultural schemas is not novel, the theory behind it is. To develop the theory and its underlying axioms, additional research must be conducted to formulate theorems and conduct further testing. Once this is accomplished, the theory can be utilized in cross-cultural training to aid individuals in adapting to their host culture environments [5]. Efforts have been made towards this goal, such as using Schema Theory to argue that cross-cultural exposure enhances entrepreneurial intentions by developing alertness, a set of skills for identifying business opportunities, especially for those living abroad or looking for work abroad [13].

Real-world example - A Sojourner's Experience
The term "sojourners" refers to individuals who reside in a culture that is not their own, with the intention of eventually returning home. Gillian Gibbons, a British teacher, traveled to Khartoum, Sudan in August 2007 to teach young students at Unity School. During a lesson on bears, a student brought in a teddy bear for the class to name. The majority of students voted to name the bear Muhammad, which led to Gibbons' arrest on November 25, 2007. She was charged under article 125 of Sudanese criminal law for insulting Islam's Prophet Muhammad, a serious offense in Islam. Gibbons faced a maximum penalty of 40 lashes and 6 months in jail, but was found guilty and sentenced to 15 days in jail and deportation from Sudan after her release. She was granted a pardon by Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir following pressure from the British government, and returned to England after serving nine days in jail [14 ].

The incident involving Gibbons can be explained by the cultural schema theory, particularly with regard to her status as a sojourner in an unfamiliar culture. Axiom number three and axiom number nine of the theory apply to Gibbons' situation. As a sojourner, it is necessary to acquire the host culture's primary, secondary, and isolated (PSI) schemas in order to adapt cross-culturally. However, Gibbons lived within the walls of Unity School, which was vastly different from the rest of Sudan and did not require her to acquire the PSI schemas of the host culture. This lack of understanding of local PSI schemas likely led to her allowing the children to name the teddy bear Muhammad, which is unacceptable in Sudanese culture. This highlights the difficulties of cross-cultural adaptation for sojourners like Gibbons, who do not intend to stay and therefore may not fully adapt to the host culture.