BELL RINGER What did you learn about memory from reviewing the PowerPoint? Write down 5 facts.

LESSON STARTER - Put this definition in the front of your binder with ISSUES. A demand characteristic is a subtle cue that makes participants aware of what the experimenter expects to find or how participants are expected to behave. Demand characteristics can change the outcome of an experiment because participants will often alter their behavior to conform to the experimenters expectations. How were demand characteristics an issue in this research?

LOFTUS AND PICKRELL'S FORMATION OF FALSE MEMORIES

BACKGROUND False memories happen when post-event information changes the original memory so a person believes that the false information really was part of the original event, even though it never existed. Loftus TED Talks

BACKGROUND This study is an extension of a study done with a 14 year old boy, Chris, whom the researchers did the exact procedure with.

‍AIM To discover whether it is possible to implant an entire false memory for an event that never happened.

METHOD ‍Method: Experiment with Self-Report interviews Qualitative: personal details about these false memories Quantitative: Percentages of recall, number of word descriptions, clarity and confidence ratings.

VARIABLES IV - The three stages of booklet completion, Interview 1 and Interview 2 Note: the time interval between the three was abandoned because of unavailability of the participants DV1 – percentage of participants recalling true and false events at all three stages DV2 – ratings of clarity of memory, 1(not clear at all) to 10 (extremely clear) DV3 – ratings of confidence in ability to recall more detail, 1 (not confident) to 5 (extremely confident)

Design Repeated Measures All participants completed all conditions of the independent variable (booklet, Interview 1 and Interview 2)

‍PARTICIPANT GROUP 24 participants went to the lab with a close family member (usually a parent or sibling) The ‘relative’ member had to be knowledgeable about subjects from the person’s early childhood 3 males, 21 females (ages 18-53) Nobody in a pair was younger than 18 Sampling Technique? Opportunity Sample – participants were recruited by University of Washington students

APPARATUS Subjects were mailed a 5 page booklet with instructions Contained 4 short stories of events that their relative described of the subject’s childhood 3 were real (stories given by relative), 1 was fake (about getting lost in a mall) False memory event was always the 3rd event presented Each story was a paragraph with space below for recording details of memories about the story

CONTROLS All four stories were a paragraph long and each false story appeared in third position in the booklet The ‘Lost in Mall’ false story was constructed from an interview with a relative who confirmed that the participant had not actually been lost. All false stories included the following true features: where the family shopped; family members who usually went shopping; shops that would attract interest

CONTROLS The ‘Lost in Mall’ false story also included lies: Lost for an extended period Crying Lost in the mall or large department store at around the age of 5 Found by an elderly woman Reunited with family

PROCEDURES Interviews were conducted with a close family member of the subject Asked to determine events from the subjects childhood between the ages of 4-6 Also asked to provide information about a plausible shopping trip that could have been taken when the subject was about 5.

PROCEDURES The actual subjects were told they were participating in a study about childhood memories and why we remember some and not others (Ethics?) They read a booklet containing different events & were told to write details down about what they remember from the events. If they did not remember an event, they would write “I do not remember this.” Once they finished the booklet, they mailed it back to the researchers.

PROCEDURES One to two weeks later the subject was interviewed either over the phone or at the university. Asked to recall as many details from these childhood events as possible. Rated their clarity and the content of the memory on a scale of 1 to 10 Rated their confidence that they could remember more information if they were given more time on a scale of 1 to 5 Once finished, they were thanked an debriefed. They were asked to think about the memories, but not to discuss them. They were not told of the deception

PROCEDURES Another session took place one to two weeks later, that was essentially the same. They were debriefed again Apologized to for the deception & having them try to guess the false memory

RESULTS – bar graph was used to show results 49 out of 72 (68%) of the true events were remembered across the booklet, Interview 1 and Interview 2 7 out of 24 participants (29%) remembered the false event but one participant, after recalling the event, decided that she did not remember

‍RESULTS The participants were more detailed with the true memories (@138 words) than the false memories (@50 words) They were clearer &more confident on the true memories than the false 19 of 24 (about 75%) of the participants resisted the false memory.

CONCLUSIONS False memories can be formed Researchers said that they don’t know what percentage of people they can be formed in, but they did conclude that it is possible This may be because the false memory was made believable. The elements were paired with elements that are common to most people’s lives, like being in a mall, crying & getting lost, which would make it easy to mistake this false memory with another one that is real

STRENGTHS High level of control The real stories came from relative. Some parts were conducted in a lab All of the variables were kept consistent for each participant False memory always the third False memory had the same content. Interviews always scheduled the same time apart from each other The real stories came from relative. Both qualitative & quantitative data. Verified the possibility of the participant actually getting lost in a mall at the age of 5.

WEAKNESSES Awkward task Ethical Issues Had to write everything they remember about each memory Interviews over telephone Ethical Issues Could cause psychological harm Deception - Made people believe in a memory that wasn’t true

WEAKNESSES Sample/Sampling Technique Sample bias: All the participants will have known a Washington University student, so may have other important characteristics in common making them less representative Gender bias: because more females (and findings may not generalize to males) Demand characteristics: All the participants will have known a psychology student, this might have made them more suspicious about the experiment. Demand characteristics - Sometimes during an experiment, a participant might pick up on some clue or bias from the researcher, the situation, or something about the experiment that gives the participant and idea of what type of response the researcher is looking for.

ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY Low? High? Awkward task could have mislead participants. Relative may not accurately remember something from so long ago. High? The people were discussing actual memories Real World Experiment Ecological Validity

USEFULNESS useful because allows police/courts to recognize that witnesses may have false memories, because people may make false accusations not useful because in the wrong hands such knowledge could provide a way to brainwash people, because it is only based on simple scenarios and real life has many more cues to the truth

Comprehension Questions What is a false memory? Where people remember events that never actually happened How does a false memory happen? A false memory happens when post event information changes the original memory, so the person believes that the false information really was part of the original event even though it never existed

Identify the three dependent variables, including rating scales. DV1 – percentage of participants recalling true and false events at all three stages DV2 – ratings of clarity of memory, 1(not clear at all) to 10 (extremely clear) DV3 – ratings of confidence in ability to recall more detail, 1 (not confident) to 5 (extremely confident)

Identify two evaluation issues. Explain. Identify the three stages of the procedure, briefly outlining what happened at each stage. Participants are sent a booklet and fill in any memories they have about each of the four events listed. Interview 1: conducted at the university (or by telephone) 1-2 weeks after completion of the booklet, recalling each event in as much detail as possible Interview 2: conducted at the university (or by phone) 1-2 weeks after Interview 1, again recalling each event in as much detail as possible Identify two evaluation issues. Explain.

Homework Research the self-report method. Make note of the key characteristics of this research method.

Resources Myers, D. (2010). Psychology, 9th Edition. New York, NY: Worth Publishers