Final: Reconstructive Nature of Memory

What are memory “sins of omission”?

• transience

• absentmindedness

• blocking

Transience

loss of info from memory with the passage of time, more time equates to more lost (OJ simpson verdict study)

Absentmindedness

lack of attention leads to memory distortions (no memory = no entry to retrieve later); not able to pick out correct penny from a grouping

Blocking

temporary failure to retrieve that increases with age (tip of the tongue phenomenon and remembering test info until handed test)

What are the memory “sins of commission”?

• persistence

• misttribution

• suggestibility

• bias

persistence

continued automatic retrieval or memories that are often unwanted (PTSD)

misattribution

memory ascribed to the wrong source (President Bush’s memory of seeing twin towers being hit was misattributed to seeing it on TV in Florida when he was reading to kids)

suggestibility

false recollection (leading questions or suggestions)

bias

influence on what we remember (Positivity effect: people remember events as more pleasant than they are actually experienced)

misattribution commissions

• cryptomnesia

• sleeper effect

• false frame effect

cryptomnesia

unintentional plagiarism due to a source monitoring error (Forgetting an idea = original thought later - good 4 u and misery business)

sleeper effect

an initially unconvincing message or fact from an unreliable source becomes more convincing over time (how fake news spreads and persists)

false frame effect

non-famous names misidentified as famous 24 hours after studying, but more accurate right after studying; misattributed source of familiarity

Weapon Focus Effect

Suspect has a weapon, memory of suspect is impaired, but memory for the weapon increases because of our tendency to focus on the weapon

Why does the weapon focus effect happen?

1. threatening nature of the gun (emotion)

2. novelty of gun in situation

misinformation effect

Eyewitnesses are highly susceptible to developing false memories for events that are suggested/presupposed to them

McCloskey & Zaragoza Stop Sign study

Loftus results can be explained without the notion of “overwriting”; proving that misleading post-event information does not destroy the original memory. They proposed that participants simply experience a demand effect or temporary guessing bias, rather than a permanently altered or replaced memory trace

overwriting

contradictory misinformation can “erase” previously stored memory representation

Garry, Manning, Loftus, and Sherman - Role of Imagination in False Memories

rate the likelihood that events occurred in childhood, imagine they occurred and describe them, “we lost original ratings, redo them?”, increased likelihood ratings after imagining

sins of omission

failure to bring something to mind

sins of commission

presence of unwanted or inaccurate memories

source monitoring

Memory traces contain features (sensory details, contextual info, emotional tone, cog. operations); Decision about “where did this come from”

imagination inflation

Simply imagining event(s) occurred is enough to “plant the seed” of a memory (Loftus)

simultaneous lineup

numerous suspects presented at one time

Relative judgment strategy (simultaneous lineup)

compare each person to one another to determine which most resembles the mental representation

Sequential lineup

suspects present one at a time and the eyewitness is not allowed to go back and will not know how many people will be presented

Absolute judgment strategy (sequential lineup)

assess each individual in isolation – comparing directly to memory; less pressure to pick anyone because don’t know # of people