Chapter 8-Memory Errors Pt. 2 Flashcards
Schema
Knowledge about some aspects of the environment
Script
Conception of sequence of actions that usually occurs during a particular experience
Schemas and scripts _______
Influence memory
- memory can include information not actually experienced but inferred because it is expected and consistent with the schema
- the constructive nature of memory can lead to errors or “false memories”
Script experiment
- Bower et al.
- showed that participants added some actions that were not mentioned when they read a passage (for e.g. check in with receptionist in the dentist office)
Coglab: false memory
- no way to assess memory accuracy without objective evidence
- the vividness or confidence of the person recalling the memory is not an accurate indication of the truth
- experiment biases people to recall things that did not occur
- a sequence of words is presented and the observer has to classify the set of words as either being seen or not in the sequence
Coglab false memory results
Recalled words from original list 79% of time, unrelated distractors (not in list) 3% and related distractor ( it in list) 69%
Results in false memory (you most likely thought about the distractor word as list was being shown and at test you have a memory of thinking about the word but thought it was because it was presented rather than realizing you just thought about the word)
In some cases, people will report that they vividly recall seeing the word despite their inaccuracy-think pin/needle
Does coglab on false memory work well even when subjects know what the experiment is about
Yes
Advantages of construction of memories
- Allows us to fill in the blanks
- cognition is creative and allows us to:
Understand language
Solve problems
Make decisions
Disadvantages of construction of memories
- sometimes we make errors
- sometimes we misattribute the source of info: was it actually presented, or did we infer it?
Misinformation effect
Misleading information presented after a person witnesses an event can change how that person describes the event later
-misleading postevent information (MPI)
Loftus and coworkers (post even experiment)
Shown slides of traffic accident with stop sign
Post event questions:
- introduce MPI: yield sign instead of the stop sign (did another car pass the red car while it was stopped at the yield sign)
- Not introduce MPI: did another car pass the red car while it was stopped at the stop sign
Loftus and Palmer (power of suggestion)
- subjects watched a film of a car crash
- asked what is speed when red car hits/smashed blue car
- those hearing “smashed” said cars were going much faster than those who heard “hit”
-power of suggestion
Reasons explaining power of suggestion
- Retroactive interference
- more recent learning interferes with memory for something in the past
- original memory trace is not replaced (just can’t retrieve it) - Source monitoring error
- failure to distinguish the source of the info
- MPI is misattributed to the original source
Lindsey (1990)
-participants heard a story with female narrator
Difficult condition: female narrator gives MPI right after story is heard. Memory test two days later (27% MPI). Had no time to finish consolidation & same voices created source monitoring error
Easy condition: two days later a male narrator gives MPI and then participants complete memory test (13% MPI)
Hyman and coworkers
- participants had conversations about experiences with experimenter (true events); experimenter added new events (false events)
- participants said “no clue” about the new events
- when discussing it 2 days later, participants remembered the new events as actually happening
Another example of source monitoring error
Participants felt familiar with false event in the second time, so they accepted it as having actually happened
Similar to become famous experiment
Lindsay et al
Reported that participants who were given the narrative of the false event together with a true old photograph recalled more false memories than participants who were not given the pictures
Wade and coworkers
Hot balloon experiment
Photoshopped image onto balloon
Errors in eyewitness testimony
Can be inaccurate
- mistaken identity
- constructive nature of memory
Wells and Bradfield
- participants view security videotape with gunman in view for 8 sec
- everyone identified someone as the gunman from photographs afterwards
- actual gunman’s picture was not presented
Errors due to attention and arousal
- attention can be narrowed by specific stimuli
- weapon focus
- Stanny and Johnson
Presence of a weapon that was fired is associated with a decrease in memory about the perpetrator and the victim and the weapon
Ross et al. Experiment on the effect of familiarity on eyewitness testimony
Experimental group: view film of a male teacher reading to students
Control: view film of female teacher reading to students
View film of female teacher being robbed
Test: when only male teacher picture present (not robber) experimental group more likely to pick him. When both are present, likelihood of picking male teacher dec
Suggestive questioning
When identifying the perpetrator of a crime from a lineup, the officer Said “which one of these men did it” implying that the perpetrator was in the lineup
Confirming feedback: after recognition, the officer said “OK” implying the pickup is correct (increases confidence level rating)
Confidence in ones memory may be increased by
Post event questioning
May make memories easier to retrieve
Reverse testing effect
Review slide
