Unit 7: Memory Illusions, Recovered Memories Flashcards
What is the background on DRM research?
the “Hot Topic” in memory
spawned from the recovered memory controversy
additional evidence for “productive” memory errors – errors of commission
What are the issues with DRM research?
what causes the FMs?
how (and when) are CLs (critical lures) correctly rejected?
What is the activation-monitoring theory proposed by Roediger and colleagues?
in general: word processing causes activation to spread related words in a semantic network
at study: activation spreads from list items to CL
at test: S encounters highly “primed” CL
source monitoring: misattributes CL activation to prior exposure
What were the methods in the Robinson & Roediger (1997) study on number of presented associates?
24 list
15 words/list
study time: 2 s/word
associates presented first, then fillers
What were the results in the Robinson & Roediger (1997) study on number of presented associates?
false memories increase as number of associates increases
What were the methods of the McDermott (1996) study on the effect of blocking on CLs?
3 DRM lists
15 words/list
study time: 2 s/word
What were the results in the Robinson & Roediger (1997) study on number of presented associates?
blocking increases false memories
blocking increases hits
What are the empirical problems with A-M theory?
AM theory incorrectly predicts factors that increase hit rates will also increase FAs for CLs
What are the theoretical problems with A-M theory?
time course at odds with semantic priming
monitoring assumes FM requires very frequent errors of commission
implication: reality monitoring very unreliable
What are the two main assumptions of the list-gist/recollection failure approach?
- gist extended during study and represented without external detail
- recollection failure (i.e. the absence of recollective information in the presence of high familiarity) is sometimes treated as a memory cue
What is List-Gist extraction?
during study: effort-after-meaning –> gist extraction
gist represented in memory, without external detail
gist reflects generalized meaning
similarity between gist and CL meaning, a matter of degree
What is the relationship between list-gist extraction and false memories?
probability that gist will be extracted and/or that gist is relative to the meaning of CL is dependent on:
number of related words (list length effect)
degree of association
proximity of related words (blocking)
What is recollection failure?
occurs when: (gist approximately equal) + NO recollection
recollection common: recollection failure –> NEW
recollection uncommon: recollection failure –> OLD
What is a dual-process and weighted cued account of recollection failure?
- low familiarity –> NEW
- recollection –> OLD
- high familiarity –> ??
What is the definition of recollection failure?
when recollection list is very common, the absence of recollection indicates item is “new”
when recollection list is very rare, the absence of recollection has no bearing in recognition decision (which will be drive by familiarity)
What were the general predictions about recollection failure and false memories?
factors that increase recollection, decrease FMs
What were the methods of the Gallo & Roediger (2002) study on the effect of study time on CLs?
16 DRM lists
15 words/list
What were the results of the Gallo & Roediger (2002) study on the effect of study time on CLs?
FM decrease with study time
hits increase with study time
What were the methods of the Benjamin (2001) study on the effect of repetition on CLs?
20 DRM lists
8 words/list
study time: 4s/word
What were the results of the Benjamin (2001) study on the effect of repetition on CLs?
FM decrease with repetition
hits increase with repetition
What were the methods of the Schacter, Israel, & Racine study on the effect of presentation format on CLs?
14 DRM lists
12 words/list
study time: 1.5s/word
presentation: auditory with either printed word or picture
What were the results of the Schacter, Israel, & Racine study on the effect of presentation format on CLs?
FM decreased in picture presentation condition
What were the findings about recollection failure and false memories?
factors increase gist = CL meaning, increase FMs
factors increase list-item recollection, decrease FMs
supports List-Gist Recollection Failure Account
What is the background of the recovered memory controversy?
adults report “recovering” forgotten memories of childhood sexual abuse (CSA)
memories often recovered during therapy
profound emotional and legal repercussions
What are the assumptions of the recovered memory controversy?
traumatic memories can be repressed/suppressed
recovery techniques produce valid memories of real events
recovering forgotten CSA memories has therapeutic value
What are the questions regarding the assumptions of the recovered memory controversy?
do/can people repress/suppress memories of CSA?
can recovery techniques produce false memories?
does memory recovering CSA memories have therapeutic value?
What were the relevant phenomena to recovered memories that were proposed by Lindsay & Read (1994)?
misinformation effect: blend facts and suggestion
source amnesia: forget source of information
imperfect reality monitoring: mistaking imagined events for real ones
reconstruction: past events reconstructed from fragmentary details and schematic knowledge
What are the recovery techniques that are employed in clinical practice when CSA is suspected?
guided imagery
hypnosis
dream interpretation
survivors’ groups
uncritical acceptance of claims
What are false memories of CSA?
“memory recovery techniques may lead some clients to create illusory memories”
imagined and/or suggested events can take on a realistic vividness and detail with extensive memory work
What are the steps of creating false memories of CSA?
step 1: create CSA story
step 2: elaborate on CSA story (suggestion, imagery, interpretation, hypnosis, social facilitation)
step 3: forget or mistake origin of CSA story (source amnesia, failed reality monitoring)
implication: it should be possible to create FM in the lab
What was the goal of the Hyman et al. (1995) study on implanting FMs with narratives?
can FMs be implanted using clinical techniques
What were the methods of the Hyman et al. (1995) study on implanting FMs with narratives?
preparation: solicit event descriptions from parents
materials:
3 “real” event descriptions
1 “false” event description (spill punch bowl at wedding)
What was the procedure of the Hyman et al. (1995) study on implanting FMs with narratives?
phase 1: recall as much as possible about each event and continue to reflect outside of lab
2-day delay
phase 2: repeat procedure
phase 3: repeat procedure
What were the results of the Hyman et al. (1995) study on implanting FMs with narratives?
true memories increase across phases
false memories increase across phases
phase 2 FM = 25%
accessing background knowledge predicts FM
FMs for 11 or 30 Ss who accessed background knowledge
FM for 2 or 20 Ss who did not access background knowledge
What was the implication of the Hyman et al. (1995) study on implanting FMs with narratives?
suggestion + background knowledge + source confusion = FM
What was the method of the Wade, Garry, Read, Lindsay (2002) study on creating FMs with photos?
3 “real” childhood photos
1 doctored childhood photo
What was the task in the Wade, Garry, Read, Lindsay (2002) study on creating FMs with photos?
recall as much as possible
three phase about 1 week apart
What were the results for false photos in the Wade, Garry, Read, Lindsay (2002) study on creating FMs with photos?
1st interview: 30% FMs
3rd interview: 50% FM
What was the conclusion of the Wade, Garry, Read, Lindsay (2002) study on creating FMs with photos?
photos compiling for support of generating false event and accept false memory
What are the three stages required to implant FMs proposed by Hyman and Loftus (1998)?
- plausibility assessment/acceptance: source (family, experts) and content (likelihood, consequentiality)
- memory construction (creation of a plausible imagined event): actively relate proposed event to self-knowledge, imagery, journaling, dream interpretation
- source monitoring error: situational/social demands, delay, repetition
What were the methods in the Williams (1994) prospective study?
participants: 129 women contacted 17 years after reported sexual abuse
age at report: 10 months to 12 years
task: 3 hour interview –> questions about sexual history, but the index event not specifically probed
What were the results of the Williams (1994) prospective study?
38% failed to report index evet: suggest repression-based forgetting of CSA very common
victim-perpetrator relation affected % who could remember: by stranger (82%) > by relative (53%)
recall increased as degree of force increase
younger victims less likely to recall event
What is a decomposing of the non-responses in the Williams (1994) prospective study?
38% failed to report index event
but: 68% (33/49) of non-responders report other abuse
non-repression based explanations: schematization, retrieval (motivational) failure, coding mismatch
thus, “pure” failure to report CSA relatively uncommon: (8.5%)
“failure to report” may reflect: unwillingness to disclose or forgetting
What are replications of the Williams (1994) prospective study?
Goodman et al. (2003):
n = 168
failure to report = 10%
Alexander et al. (2005): memory for CSA increased with severity of trauma
What are the three views on repressed and false memory?
repressed memory view: Traumatic Dissociative Amnesia underlies ALL recovered memories
false memory view: ALL recovered memories are implanted
middle ground: CSA events can be forgotten and later recalled, repression/dissociative processes not required/involved
What are the three states of CSA memory according to the middle ground view?
- continuous memory
discontinuous memories:
2. spontaneous recovery
3. during-therapy recovery
What is the evidence for the middle ground view?
corroborated case studies exist
between-group corroboration rates
45% –> continuous group
37% –> spontaneous group
0% –> recall in therapy group
rated-surprise: spontaneous»_space; recalled-in-therapy
What is the model nature of a recovered abuse event in spontaneous recovery in McNally (2007)?
victim’s age: 7 or 8
non-violent molestation
perpetrator: close relative
(recalled) initial reaction: “confused and upset, but not terrified”, “not fully understood as sexual abuse”
What is the “normal” spontaneous recovery of CSA?
Time 1: CSA little understood/discussed, CSA “forgotten” like other past events
Time 2: context-cued recovery of CSA event, CSA understood as abuse, leading to “intense emotional distress”
What are the assumptions of the logic of repression?
assumptions:
CSA is always traumatic
normally, traumatic events are NOT forgotten
CSA events sometimes forgotten
therefore:
1. forgetting can’t be “normal”
2. so a special forgetting process must evoked by CSA
What are the assumptions of the logic of “middle ground”?
assumptions:
CSA is NOT always traumatic
memory for non-traumatic events is normally discontinuous
CSA events sometimes forgotten
therefore:
1. forgetting can be “normal”
2. so a special forgetting process need NOT be evoked by CSA events
What is a summary of the cognitive perspective on recovered memories discussed in lecture?
traumatic events are well remembered
continuous memory for CSA is normal
CSA can be forgotten and recovered
repression/dissociation not required
spontaneous CSA memories more credible than recalled-in-therapy memories
because, memory recovery techniques can produce false memories
