Forgetting True Memories and Creating False Memories
(This page last updated 1 November, 2005.)
Possible Explanations for Forgetting
Evidence that Memories can be Changed After they are
Recorded
- Loftus & Palmer (1974)
- Leading question with "hit" or "smashed"
- "Smashed" produces faster speed judgments.
- Subjects hearing "smashed" more likely to report broken
glass later.
- Hyman, Husband,& Billings (1995)
- Repeated suggestions of nonexistent childhood event.
- After 3 sessions, 25% of subjects report recall for
event.
- Many of those provide details of event.
Flashbulb Memories
- Highly detailed memories of very significant events.
- Brown & Kulik (1977) studied people's memories of where
they were when Kennedy was shot.
- Neisser & Harsch (1992) find large differences in recall
of Challenger explosion after 3 years.
Confidence in Memory
- Little connection between memory confidence and memory
accuracy.
- Just because someone is confident in a specific memory does
not mean that it is more likely to be true.
Evidence for Accurate Memory
- Yuille & Cutshall (1986)
- Interviewed 13 crime witnesses.
- Reported details about what happened 83% correct.
- Descriptions of objects 90% correct.
- Recall can improve when more time is available.
- Memory for identities of high school classmates fairly stable
for over 30 years.
Summary
- Most memories are accurate.
- False memories do occur, and it can be very difficult to
determine which memories are true and which are false.
- Confidence can be high for false memories.
- False memories can have a high level of detail.
next class: Network Models of
Memory
Psych 315H: Cognitive
Psychology
Kyle Cave
Psychology Dept.
U.
Mass.