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

The study of memory is witnessing a spirited clash between proponents of traditional laboratory research and those advocating a more natural istic approach to the study of ''real-life'' or ''everyday'' memory. T he debate has generally centered on the ''what'' (content), ''where'' (context), and ''how'' (methods) of memory research. In this target ar ticle, we argue that the controversy discloses a further, more fundame ntal breach between two underlying memory metaphors, each having disti nct implications for memory theory and assessment: Whereas traditional memory research has been dominated by the storehouse metaphor, leadin g to a focus on the number of items remaining in store and accessible to memory, the recent wave of everyday memory research has shifted tow ard a correspondence metaphor, focusing on the accuracy of memory in r epresenting past events. The correspondence metaphor calls for a resea rch approach that differs from the traditional one in important respec ts: in emphasizing the intentional-representational function of memory , in addressing the wholistic and graded aspects of memory corresponde nce, in taking an output-bound assessment perspective, and in allowing more room for the operation of subject-controlled metamemory processe s and motivational factors. This analysis can help tie together some o f the what, where, and how aspects of the ''real-life/laboratory'' con troversy. More important, however, by explicating the unique metatheor etical foundation of the accuracy-oriented approach to memory we aim t o promote a more effective exploitation of the correspondence metaphor in both naturalistic and laboratory research contexts.