Reconstructive memory

• Reliablitity


  To repeat something and yield the same result
• Confabulation


  A memory based on a fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memory believed to be true
• schema processing


  memory processing based on prior knowledge in the form of schemas, sometimes resulting in distortion
• False memories


  recalling on an event that never happened and believing it to be true
• Reconstructive memory


  a theory of memory recall where the act of remembering is influenced by various other cognitive processes (the memory is reconstructed). It is the memory after an event or situation after it has happened.
• Explicit memory


  a type of long term memory that is conscious
• Implicit memory


  A type of long term memory that is unconscious
• Episodic memory


  a type of explicit memory about events that happened to you
• Semantic memory

  A type of explicit memory containing knowledge about the world
• Emotional states memory


  A type of implicit memory relating to emotions
• Procedural memory


  a type of implicit memory relating to the nervous system (e.g. motor neurons)
• Proactive interferance


  when old information interferes with new information (like schema processing)
• Retroactive interference


  when new information interferes with old information, like misleading post-event information (AKA confabulation)
• What factors are most likely to distort memory?


  High emotion

  The desire to 'fill in the gaps' (schema)

  Post event information
• What was the aim of Loftus and palmer (1974)'s study?


  Loftus and Palmer (1974)'s aim was to investigate whether leading questions asked of eyewitnesses after an event can change memory of that event.
• What was Loftus and palmer (1947)'s procedure?


  A convenience sample of 45 American university students were split into five groups and shown seven film clips of traffic accidents. After each clip, they had to write a brief account and then answer some questions. The leading question was 'How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?' and the word 'hit' was replaced with 'smashed' 'collided' 'bumped' or 'contacted' for the separate groups.

  They then conducted another experiment with 150 students, divided into three groups where they watched a film of a car accident. They were asked questions about the accident, including the question about speed, but only using the words 'hit' or 'smashed' in two of the groups. The third group was a control and did not have the question about speed. the participants were asked to come back a week later and were asked without watching the video, 'Did you see any broken glass?
• What were Loftus and Palmer (1947)'s findings?


  The verb 'smash' yielded an estimate of 40.5 mph, and the verb 'contacted' yielded an estimate of 31.8 mph. Those who had the question with 'smashed' rather than 'hit' were more likely to have remembered broken glass.
• What was Loftus and Palmer (1947)'s conclusion?


  They concluded that external information after an event can change the memory of it. This links to schema theory because the schema invoked by 'smashed' is a more serious accident than the one invoked by 'contacted'. The schema associated with the verb 'filled in the gap' in memory .
• What were some strengths of Loftus and Palmer (1947)'s study?


  Variables were controlled so low bidirectional ambiguity

  The procedure was standardised, and could be easily replicated

  Demand characteristics were reduced as the leading question was hidden among filler questions, increasing internal validity
• What were some weaknesses of Loftus and Palmer (1974)'s study?


  A student sample was used, so the study has low generalisability

  Demand characteristics may have been present as the participants were aware that they were part of a study

  Ecological validity was low as the experiment was conducted in a lab

  It is unclear if schemas influence memory in other tasks not relating to estimating speed

  memory may have been influenced by many factors, not just the choice of verbs
• What was the aim of Shaw and Porter (2017)'s study?


  Their aim was to investigate whether complete false memories of committing crimes involving police contact could be generated in a controlled experimental setting.
• What was Shaw and Porter (2017)'s procedure?


  60 Canadian undergraduate students (18-31) were offered $50 for participation. They were all, except for five, Caucasian, and all, except for five, native English speakers. 43 of them were female. They were told that the study was an examination of memory-retrieval methods.

  they tried to convince them that they had committed a crime between 11 and 14. An interview script was used by the same researcher for all participants. the caregivers provided the researchers with information of a true event, and other relevant info.

  Participants completed three interviews at one week intervals, each fourth minutes long, about the two events. The true event was always presented first, to maximise the researcher's credibility. Participants were asked to explain what happened in each event. If the participants could not recall the false event, the researcher would use tactics to encourage them.

  The interviewer used specific tactics, such as irrefusable false evidence ('in... your caregiver said...'), social pressure, building rapport with participants, using facilitators (nodding, smiling), presuming additional knowledge ('this sounds like what your caregiver described')

  The participants were asked follow-up questions for both the true and the false event, such as their perspective in the memory, the vividness of the memory, sensory details within the memory, their confidence in the memory, and to rate the anxiety they experienced at the time of the event.

  Participants were finally debriefed in which the deception of the false memory was revealed and asked how often they had visualised that memory at home, how surprised they were that it was false, how suspicious of the interviewer they had been, and whether they had believed that the false event had actually happened.
• What were Shaw and Porter (2017)'s findings?


  The participant's rate of false recollection was 70% for criminal events, and 76.67% for non-criminal events. The false memories of these events were richly detailed. False memories relating to committing a crime were formed in a similar way to false memories of non-criminal activities. They also shared many characteristics with true memories.
• What was Shaw and Porter (2017)'s conclusion?


  They concluded that people can come to visualise and recall detailed false memories of engaging in criminal behaviour.
• What are some strengths of Shaw and Porter (2017)'s study?


  High external and internal validity as it is similar to real world false memories and the influence of others
• What are some weaknesses of Shaw and Porter (2017)'s study?


  It is deterministic- suggests that all people will behave in the same way

  It is ethnocentric and therefore not very generalisable

  Used a student sample so not very generalisable
• What was the aim of Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s study?


  Their aim was to investigate the accuracy in recall of eyewitnesses to a real crime, in response to leading questions and over time (using a real gun shooting)
• What was Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s procedure?


  There was an incident in Vancouver, where a thief robbed a shop. The owner of the shop tried to escape, but a third their shot the owner. The owner then shot the thief with all six bullets in his gun- killing him. There were 21 eyewitnesses, all interviewed by the police.

  20 of the eyewitnesses were contacted by the researchers four-to-five months after the event, asking them to take part in a study. 13 of them agreed, and they were all aged 15-32, three female, ten male.

  The participants were interviewed, recorded and transcribed. They used the same interview procedure as the police- allowing them to give their account first and then asking questions. One half of the group was asked if they saw 'a broken headlight' and the other if they had seen 'the broken headlight'. Truthfully, there was no broken headlight. One half was asked about 'the yellow panel' of the car, and the other about 'a yellow panel'. The panel was truthfully blue. The participants were also asked to rate their stress at the time of the accident on a seven-point scale, and if they had any emotional problems at the time of or after the event.

  A scoring procedure was used to turn the qualitative data into quantitative- the researchers used systems of 'action details' and 'description details' to collate information. The 'description details' were split into object descriptions and people descriptions.
• What were Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s findings?


  The researchers obtained more information than the police did. they found over 1000 details, whereas the police only found 650. the misleading questions had little effect on their recall. Ten of the participants correctly said that there was no broken headlight, and no yellow panel.
• What was Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s conclusion?


  They concluded that eyewitnesses were not inaccurate, contradicting previous lab experiments (especially Loftus and Palmer)
• What were some strengths of Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s study?


  It is ecologically valid as it is not a lab experiment

  Thy used method triangulation, meaning it has strong validity and credibility

  the findings were carefully analysed

  Data was turned to quantitative, which is not subjective or biased
• What were some weaknesses of Yuille and Cutshall (1986)'s study?


  Difficult to generalise as it is a case study

  The scoring procedure was slightly weak