False memories - the reconstructive nature of memory Flashcards
Why might one not be able to remember something?
- Failure to encode
- Failure to store/retain
- Inability to access/retrieve it
Define recovered memory.
The reappearance in consciousness of memories for past events after a period during which these memories were not accessible.
Give examples of recovered memory.
- Professor Cheit for sexual abuse which occurred 24 years earlier (Freyd, 1996)
- Schobe and Schooler (2001) - 14 examples of memories for childhood sexual abuse recovered spontaneously or as part of a course of psychotherapy
What, according to Schooler et al. (1997), are the three key requirements for recovered memory?
Reality of event, reality of forgetting, reality of recovering.
What is false memory syndrome?
The systematic creation of memories for events which never in fact happened.
Give an example of a false memory.
Paul Ingram’s memories for suggestions from interrogators - Ofshe made up a situation and Ingram then ‘remembered’ it and confessed (Loftus, 1997).
How are false memories frequently created?
As a result of careless use of ‘memory work’ during psychotherapy (7/14 of the cases by Schobe and Schooler, 2001).
What types of items are on recall tests?
Critical lures (similar but not on list)
Distractors
Targets (1st/last or mid-list)
What is a critical lure?
An item which is a close associate of items on the list which wasn’t actually there. Also known as a critical item.
What did Roediger and McDermott (1995) find in their first experiment on recall?
U shaped serial position curve for recalling 12 items on a list.
Over 65% probability of recalling an item from the list, but 40% probability of recalling an item which wasn’t on the list (same probability as middle serial positions).
What did Roediger and McDermott (1995) find in their first experiment on recognition?
Mean hit rate (response 3/4) 86%, mean false alarm rate for critical lures 84%.
How can signal detection theory be used to measure memory performance?
By comparing the hit rate with the false alarm rate.
How did Roediger and McDermott (1995)’s second experiment differ from their first?
Used longer lists and more of them (15 items and 16 lists, attempted recall for half and recognition for all).
What did Roediger and McDermott (1995) find in their second experiment on recall?
Mean overall probability of recalling a critical lure rose to 55%.
What is the remember/know distinction?
Tulving 1985:
• remember = actually remember presentation of item
• know = think it was on the list but don’t remember the presentation context.
What did Roediger and McDermott’s second experiment on recognition find?
Recall condition - no difference between remembering/knowing or total (80%) on studied item or critical lure.
No recall condition - more likely to ‘know’ critical lure than studied item (24/34%), totals 65% for studied item and 72% for lure,
In cases where the critical lure was recalled, total recognition is 93%, of which 73% is remembering.
What is the DRM paradigm?
False memories are relatively easy to produce. Deese, Roger and McDermott - pts cannot distinguish between real and false memories.
What are some problems with the DRM paradigm?
- words presented in a list - not really events.
- false memories of childhood sexual abuse events are not close associates of real events.
- generalisation - lab.
What did the ‘lost in a shopping mall’ study by Loftus and Pickrell (1995) involve?
24 undergraduates and their parents/older siblings.
Use 4 short stories from around the age of 5, 3 real and 1 false.
Students fill in a questionnaire, 7 ‘remembered’ the false event and 6 maintained this at interviews several weeks afterwards. Confidence/clarity increases with retelling.
When debriefed, 19/24 students correctly identified the false event - 5 guessed one of the real events.
What support has been found for Loftus and Pickrell (1995)?
- replicated with other childhood events (Ceci et al., 1994)
- using UK home office approved guidelines (Ost et al, 2005)
- using false or real photograph cues (Garry and Gerrie, 2005; Wade et al., 2002)
What are the conclusions and implications from research on false memories?
- simple lab experiments can produce high levels
- false memories cannot be easily distinguished from real memories
- our childhood memories may be mixtures of suggestions, fabrications, family stories, or other people’s memories
- human memory does not provide a consistent record of real events - it is a reconstruction from many sources.
