MEMORY
LECTURE ONE: RECOVERED AND FALSE MEMORIES
R E CO V ER E D M EM O R IES
The reappearance in consciousness of memories for past events after a period during which
these memories were not accessible.
Example: (Freyd, 1996) – Professor Cheit suddenly remembered being sexually abused as
a child at camp. The abuser confessed.
Good evidence that recovered memories do actually exist as clinical phenomena.
It’s claimed that memories for childhood sexual abuse can be recovered spontaneously or
as part of a course of psychotherapy. (Shobe& Schooler provide 14 examples)
Shooler et al said to count as a recovered memory, there are 3 key requirements
- Reality of event
- Reality of forgetting
- Reality of recovery.
FA LS E M E M OR IE S
The systematic creation of memories for events which never in fact occurred.
Example: (Loftus, 1997) Example of Paul Ingram who was accused of sexually abusing his
daughters. One of his daughters went to a church camp where they were encouraged to
remember sexual abuse – she accused him. Ingram was so manipulated by therapists and
detectives that he began to admit the abuse. Richard Ofshe investigated the church camp
and thought Ingram was innocent, so he asked Ingram to remember making his son &
daughter have sex for his pleasure. Ofshe repeatedly told Ingram to remember it and
Ingram later admitted it, even though his daughter denied it ever happened.
Memories are frequently created as a result of “memory work” during psychotherapy (7 of
Shobe & Schooler’s 14 examples) – therapists have a desire to create false memories.
There is strong evidence for both true and false recovered memories.
, Roediger & McDermott (1995)
Gave pps lists of words to recall. Then presented them with a recognition task – pps are
presented with words and have to say if they were on the original list or not.
They found a mean overall probability of 40% of recalling a critical item that was not on the
list.
The critical item/ lure used is linked to the original list. E.g. critical lure = mountain, the
items on the list are the top 15 words associated with mountain- hill, valley, steep, goat etc.
In Recognition tests:
- Old Item (target) –originally on list
- New Item (distractor)
- Saying YES to an old item = Hit
- Saying YES to a new item = False Alarm
- Saying NO to an old item = Miss
- Saying NO to a new item = Correct Rejection.
Mean Hit rate for the items that were on the list (correct) = 86%
Mean False Alarm rate for critical items not on the list = 84%
Experiment 2
Used longer lists and more of them (16 lists, 15 items) and participants attempted recall for
only half the lists, but recall for them all.
Mean overall probability of recalling critical item not on the list = 55%.
Used Remember / Know distinction for recognition
- Remember = vivid memory for the actual presentation of the item.
- Know = sure that item was on the list but no actual memory of hearing the word.
Recall condition:
- Studied item (on list): Remember =57%
- Critical lure : Remember = 58%
Non Recall condition:
- Studied item (on list): Remember = 41%
- Critical Lure : Remember: 38%
So no real difference between real / fake memories.
Recall condition:
- Studied item: knowing = 22%, total =79%
- Critical Lure: knowing = 23%, total = 81%
Non Recall condition
LECTURE ONE: RECOVERED AND FALSE MEMORIES
R E CO V ER E D M EM O R IES
The reappearance in consciousness of memories for past events after a period during which
these memories were not accessible.
Example: (Freyd, 1996) – Professor Cheit suddenly remembered being sexually abused as
a child at camp. The abuser confessed.
Good evidence that recovered memories do actually exist as clinical phenomena.
It’s claimed that memories for childhood sexual abuse can be recovered spontaneously or
as part of a course of psychotherapy. (Shobe& Schooler provide 14 examples)
Shooler et al said to count as a recovered memory, there are 3 key requirements
- Reality of event
- Reality of forgetting
- Reality of recovery.
FA LS E M E M OR IE S
The systematic creation of memories for events which never in fact occurred.
Example: (Loftus, 1997) Example of Paul Ingram who was accused of sexually abusing his
daughters. One of his daughters went to a church camp where they were encouraged to
remember sexual abuse – she accused him. Ingram was so manipulated by therapists and
detectives that he began to admit the abuse. Richard Ofshe investigated the church camp
and thought Ingram was innocent, so he asked Ingram to remember making his son &
daughter have sex for his pleasure. Ofshe repeatedly told Ingram to remember it and
Ingram later admitted it, even though his daughter denied it ever happened.
Memories are frequently created as a result of “memory work” during psychotherapy (7 of
Shobe & Schooler’s 14 examples) – therapists have a desire to create false memories.
There is strong evidence for both true and false recovered memories.
, Roediger & McDermott (1995)
Gave pps lists of words to recall. Then presented them with a recognition task – pps are
presented with words and have to say if they were on the original list or not.
They found a mean overall probability of 40% of recalling a critical item that was not on the
list.
The critical item/ lure used is linked to the original list. E.g. critical lure = mountain, the
items on the list are the top 15 words associated with mountain- hill, valley, steep, goat etc.
In Recognition tests:
- Old Item (target) –originally on list
- New Item (distractor)
- Saying YES to an old item = Hit
- Saying YES to a new item = False Alarm
- Saying NO to an old item = Miss
- Saying NO to a new item = Correct Rejection.
Mean Hit rate for the items that were on the list (correct) = 86%
Mean False Alarm rate for critical items not on the list = 84%
Experiment 2
Used longer lists and more of them (16 lists, 15 items) and participants attempted recall for
only half the lists, but recall for them all.
Mean overall probability of recalling critical item not on the list = 55%.
Used Remember / Know distinction for recognition
- Remember = vivid memory for the actual presentation of the item.
- Know = sure that item was on the list but no actual memory of hearing the word.
Recall condition:
- Studied item (on list): Remember =57%
- Critical lure : Remember = 58%
Non Recall condition:
- Studied item (on list): Remember = 41%
- Critical Lure : Remember: 38%
So no real difference between real / fake memories.
Recall condition:
- Studied item: knowing = 22%, total =79%
- Critical Lure: knowing = 23%, total = 81%
Non Recall condition
