Laney et al. (false memory) Flashcards
What is the name of this study?
Asparagus, a love story. healthier eating could just be a false memory away
what year was this study conducted?
2008
Psychology being investigated in this study?
Peoples memories of their own lives can be incorrect
researchers have been able to impact false details for actual events and entirely false events
from all the stored information, people can reconstruct memories by filling in the gaps and using false information that gets embedded as actual information
what is the background of this study?
human memory is subject to many types of levels and distortion
previous research has focused on negative and neutral false memories. this research focuses on implanting positive false memories
what were the overall aims of this study?
to investigate whether positive false memories for loving asparagus can be implanted into people and then change their childhood memories about liking asparagus
to investigate the consequences of implanting positive false memories in terms of the effects it has on liking asparagus and choosing asparagus
What were the aims of experiment 1?
to investigate whether positive false memories for loving asparagus can be implanted into people and then change their childhood memories about liking asparagus
what was the procedure for experiment 1?
research method: lab experiment and questionnaires
experimental design: indépendant measures group
IV: love group and control group (believers and non-believers)
DV: ratings on critical items on both questionnaires - comparing session 1 and 2
Sample: 128 undergraduates at the university of California (77% females) mean age group was 20.8 and were assigned randomly to the love and control group
In session 1, the participants were told that they would be completing a series of questionnaires for a study of the relationship between food preferences and personality. they were not told anything about false memories in order to limit the number of demand characteristics.
they completed the Food history inventory which consisted of 24 items including the “loved asparagus the first time you tried it” in the 16th position. participants rated each item on a scale of 1 (definitely did not happen) to 8 (definitely did happen) before the age of 10
participants then completed the restaurant questionnaire the assessed their desire to eat 32 separate dishes including. the critical item “sautéed asparagus spears”. this questionnaire was formatted to look like a menu with 5 categories. participants were asked to imagine they were out of a special dinner and order each item regardless of price. they circled the ratings from 1 (definitely yes) to 8 (definitely not)
participants completed 3 additional filler questionnaires - a personality measure, Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale, and a questionnaire on eating habits - to disguise the true aim of the study
After one week at session 2, participants returned and were given false feedback about their responses. they were told falsely that their responses were entered into a computer which generated a food profile of their early childhood experiences with food
their profiles were presented as if they had been individually tailed for each one
a section of the profile, was the same for all “as a child you disliked spinach, enjoyed fried foods, and liked it when fellow classmates bought food to class”. for the love group, the critical “you loved to eat cooked asparagus” was added into the 3rd position
to ensure that participants processed the feedback, they all responded to brief questions about the sweets at school item, and the love group answered the same questions about asparagus
they were asked to imagine the setting. “where were you, who was with you”. they then rated on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 9 (very much) how much the experience had affected their adult life
participants completed the Food history inventory and the restaurant questionnaire to asses changes from pre to post-manipulation
they additionally completed 2 new questionnaires: the food preferences questionnaire and the food costs questionnaire
FPQ: they had to rate 62 food items on a Likert scale 1 (don’t like to eat) to 8 (like to eat)
FCQ: they had to indicate whether they would buy 21 different foods and how much they would pay for it. they had to choose one of 7 statements
participants also had to complete the memory belief test, where they had to choose one of three options for 3 foods (including asparagus)
(a) specific memory of the event
(b) belief that the event occurred
(c) positive that event had not occurred
participants were fully debriefed and excused
what were the results of experiment 1?
FHI: the results of 31 participants were excluded as they liked asparagus before manipulation. mean ratings of love group increased by 2.6 points and in the control group by 0.2 points
Memory/belief in love group, 22% reported a memory, 35% reported a belief, and 43% were certain that the event had not occurred. in the control group, 12% reported a memory, 28% reported a belief, and 61% were certain that the event had not occurred
Believers vs non-believers. believers were the participants who were susceptible to mainipulation, while non-believers were those who weren’t. 48% of the participants were labelled as believers. FHI rating increased on an average of 4.5 points for believers and 0.9 points for non-believers. memory increased on an average by 5.5 and belief by 3.6 points for the FHI
on the RQ, believers reported more desire to eat asparagus at session 2 than the control group. believers rated asparagus more favourable than controls, and their ratings increased from pre to post manipulation, while those of the controls did not.
on the FPQ, believers reported liking asparagus significantly more than the control group and were willing to pay more for asparagus
believers were also willing to pay more for asparagus than the control group
what were the aims of experiment 2?
to replicate and extend the findings of experiment 1
to examine possible underlying mechanisms of false memories by looking at whether the sight of asparagus is more appealing to people after the false manipulation about asparagus
what was the procedure of experiment 2?
research method: lab experiment and questionnaires
experimental design: indépendant measures design
IV: love group and control group: believers and non-believers
DV: ratings on critical items on both questionnaires - comparing session 1 and 2
Sample: 103 undergraduates at the university of Washington, who receive course credits for their time. 62% of them were females and the participants had a mean age of 19.9. they were randomly assigned to the love and control group
at session 1, when the participants arrived, they were told that their data would be entered into a computer system that generated a profile based on their answers. no cover story was given
participants completed the FHI, FPQ, and RQ. to disguise the true aim of the study, they also completed two filler questionnaires - a personality measure and Marlowe-crowne social desirability scale
one week later at session 2, participants returned and received false feedback about their responses from session 1
this was identical to that given in experiment 1. the critical item was “you loved asparagus the first time you ate it”
love group participants completed an elaboration exercise. they had to answer a set of questions about their memory for this event.
if they appeared to struggle, they were asked to imagine what might have happened. they were also asked their age, location, what they were doing at the time, and how it made them feel
all participants produced qualitative data to the question “what is the most important childhood, food related event in your life that your profile did not report?”
participants then looked at the 20 slides of common food including the asparagus
each slide was shown fr 30 second and was rated on 4 criteria:
how appetising they found the picture
how disgusting they found the picture
whether the photograph was taken by a novice, amateur, or professional
the artistic quality of the picture
points 1, 2 and 4 were rated on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 8 (very much)
participants then completed FPQ, RQ, and FHI again and the Memory/belief questionnaire
they were then fully debriefed and excused
what were the results of experiment 2?
FHI: both groups appeared to rate the critical item similarly before manipulation but different afterwards. 30 people were excluded from analysis. more the love group, mean confidence increased by 2.5 points, but only 1.07 points for the control group
Memory/belief in the love group: 28% of participants reported a memory, 28% a belief, and 45% were certain that the event did not occur. in the control group, 6% of participants reported a memory, 38% a belief, and 56% were certain that the event did not occur. the ratings for asparagus event increased by 5.4 points in the love group and 3.5 for those with a belief
believers vs non believers: in the love group, 21 participants were labelled as believers. ratings increased dramatically from a mean of 1.95 in session 1 to 6.48 in session 2. for non-believers the ratings increased from 1.42 to 1.68. only 0.07 points. males and females were equally likely to form a false memory
believers reported a higher desire to eat asparagus
the ratings for neither believers nor controls changed significantly from pre to post manipulation on the restaurant questionnaire
believers rated asparagus as more appetising than controls
believers rated 1.81 on the disgusting scale for asparagus, while the controls rated it as 3.24
the rating for believers and controls did not differ on dimensions of expertise
what were the conclusions of this study?
participants can be given positive false food beliefs that have consequences
those who believed the false feedback were more likely to rate asparagus as being more appetising
what were the ethical issues surrounding this study?
participants were deceived about the aim of this study
informed consent could not be obtained as the participants did not know the true aim hence consent could not be given
what were the strengths of this study?
the study has high levels of standardisation so it is reliable
the study has many controls which increases its validity
the use of quantitative data allows for easier statistical analyses
what are the weaknesses of this study?
lacks ecological validity and mundane realism
the study has a low generalisability as the sample only consisted of students
most of the data was collected through questionnaires which introduces the chance of demand characteristics hence reducing the validity of this study
ratings are subjective, which also reduce validity
