Formation of false memories

Formation of false memories

1. Memory?

   • Memory is your mind's storehouse, the reservoir of your accumulated learning. The persistence of learning over time is through storage and retrieval.
     • Retroactive interference : It occurs when new learning or new information interferes with you ability to recall what you learned earlier.

2. AIM

   • 1. To understand how we get tricked (memory distortion) by revised data about a witnessed event
   • 2. Can a false memory be implanted?

3. SAMPLE

   • 24 participants - (3M, 21F) recruited by the university of Washington students
   • A pair of individuals - subject and subjects relative (who had knowledge about the childhood events of the subject)

4. MATERIAL

   • 5 page booklet - cover letter with instructions for completing the booklet and schedule for interviews
     • 4 SHORT STORIES - 3 true events (provided by the relative) and 1 false event about child getting lost. Single Paragraphs about each event , remaining pages blank for Participants to reproduce memory
       • ORDER OF EVENTS WAS SAME - False event always on 3rd position

5. PROCEDURE

   • SUBJECT'S RELATIVE was interviewed to obtain 3 events that happened to the subject between 4 to 6 years of age. NOT TO BE FAMILY FOLKLORE OR TRAUMATIC EVENTS. information about a plausible shopping trip was obtained (where they usually shpped when subject was 5 yrs old, who went along, which store attracted the subject's attention and verification that subject was not lost in a mall at the age of 5)
     • Features of the false event : 1. lost for an extended period, 2. Crying, 3. lost in a mall at the age of 5, 4. found and aided by an elderly woman, 5. reunited with family.
   • Subject told the study is about childhood memories and how and why people remember some and not others
     • Told to read and write anything they remember about each event - if not remembered write "i dont remember this", booklet mailed back
       • SUBJECTS CALLED AND SCHEDULED FOR 2 INTERVIEWS
         • 1st interview - 1 or 2 weeks after the reciept of the booklet 2nd interview- 1 or 2 weeks after the 1st interview interviewers - 2 females
         • 1ST INTERVIEW - REMINDED OF EACH EVENT, ASKED TO RECALL AS MUCH AS THEY COULD. 2. Rated their clarity on a scale of 1-10, 3. Rated their confidence on a 5 point scale, that if given more time they would remember. Same for 2nd interview
           • After the 2nd interview - DEBRIEFED AND ASKED TO CHOOSE WHICH OF THE 4 EVENTS WAS FALSE.

6. RESULTS

   • MEMORY FOR EVENTS
     • TRUE EVENTS - 49/ 72 (68%) were remembered in the booklet, constant for 1st and 2nd interview
     • FALSE EVENT - 7/24 partially or fully remembered, in the 1st interview it dropped to 6/24, which was held constant in the 2nd interview
   • Number of words used to describe memories
     • True memories - 138.0
     • False memory - 49.9
   • Clarity ratings for events
     • True events - 6.3 (constant for both interviews)
     • False event - 2.8 in 1st interview, 3.6 in 2nd interview
   • Confidence ratings for events
     • True events - 2.7 in 1st interview, 2.2 in 2nd
     • False event - 1.8 in 1st interview, 1.4 in 2nd
   • when asked to choose false event after debriefing
     • 19/24 correctly chose the false event as getting lost

7. CONCLUSION

   • 1. People can be lead to believe entire events happen to them after suggestions to that effect - existance proof for the phenomenon of false memory information. 2. Memory can be altered via suggestion . 3.

8. Advantages and Disadvantages

   • 1.Experiment - High level of control, standardized procedures for all participants. 2. Ecological validity is high - False event made believable, cannot be easily identified (little chance of demand characteristics) and all memories were real world scenarios 3. Interview - quantitative and qualitative data - objective and rich data obtained. 4. Ethics - debriefing and confidentiality. 5.Usefulness and Application.
     • Usefulness and Application
   • 1. Sample - unrepresentative. 2.False memory was a common situation, participants could have been recalling that memory. 3. Ethics - Deception and there could have been harm done to the participants (mentally). 4.Questionnaire - could be untruthful and call relatives to verify.