Download Mean - Fitchburg State University

False Memories of Words
Jessica M. Santos & Dr. Hildy Schilling(sponsor)
Behavioral Sciences Department
Abstract
This experiment was designed to investigate false memories
which occur when one reports having seen words that he/she
did not see. Participants viewed either related words (e.g.,
“band,” “rhythm”) or unrelated words (e.g., "anger,”
snail). Next, participants completed either a recall task in which
they wrote down the words that they recalled or a recognition
task in which they were given a list of words and asked to circle
the words that they remember seeing. As expected, it was
found that participants who had seen the related words had
more false memories than the groups with the unrelated words.
Also as expected, participants remembered more words when
they were given the recognition task than when they were given
the recall task. There was no interaction between the type of
word list and type of test .
Introduction
A false memory occurs when one reports remembering an
event that did not occur. For example, Deese, Roediger, and
McDermott (2001), presented word lists to their participants who
then remembered words that were similar to words on the list.
Hearing or seeing the words: “tired”, “rest”, and “bed” may
activate the concept of sleep so that it is remembered as though
it had been on the list, even though it was not shown.
Researchers have found that performance on a
recognition test is superior to that on a recall test (Balota &
Neely ,1980; Petrusic & Dillon, 1972). During a recognition
test, a participant sees a word or answer and picks it out from
others, because it looks familiar. During a recall task, the
participant has to generate the information from long term
memory and write it down. Many students prefer taking a
multiple- choice test (which is a recognition task) to taking an
essay test (which is a recall task) because it is easier to select
information than to generate it from long term memory.
In the present experiment, the participants viewed a list of
words that were either related to each other or unrelated to
each other, and then they took either a recognition test or a
recall test. It was expected that more words would be
remembered by those who took the recognition test than those
who took the recall test. Also, it was expected that participants
who saw the related words would have more false memories
than those who saw the unrelated words.
Procedure
Participants viewed a Power Point slide show of 15 related or
unrelated words.
Participants were asked to work on solving mazes for 3 minutes.
For the recognition test, participants were given a list of 30
words, and they circled the words that were shown on the slide
show. For the recall test, participants wrote down the words that
they printed
recalled
from the slide show.
by
www.postersession.com
Study Design
Results
Two 2 x 2 between-subjects ANOVAs with an alpha level set to .05 were used for the
analyses. Mean number of items recalled from the related lists was 5.6 items which
was not statistically greater than items from the unrelated list which was 4.3 items,
F(1,36) = 4.165, p = .049. For number of items remembered, the mean for
recognized items which was 9.6 items was statistically greater than the mean
number of recalled items which was 4.95 items, F(1,36) = 68.102 , p =.000. For
number of items remembered there was no interaction between stimulus type and
test type, F(1,36) = .071, p = .792.
Mean number of false memories from the related list was 1.7 items which was
statistically greater than the mean number for unrelated items which was .3 items,
F(1,36) = 6.617 , p = .014. Mean number of false memories for the recognition test
was 1 .7 which was statistically greater than the mean number of false memories for
the recall test which was .75, F(1,36) = 11.456, p = .002. For false memories, there
was no interaction between stimulus type and test type, F(1,36) = .898, p = .350.
This study used a 2 x 2 between-subjects design. The
independent variables were word list (related or unrelated) and
test type (recognition or recall). The dependent variables were
the number of correctly remembered words and the number of
false memories.
List 1
List 2
List 3
List 4
Note
Anger
Bed
Girl
Sound
High
Rest
Crawl
Piano
Black
Awake
Rough
Sing
King
Tired
Touch
Music
Water
Sleep
Jail
Radio
Bread
Dream
Sleep
Harmony
Boy
Drained
Honey
Band
Chair
Wake
Snail
Song
Thread
Night
Fast
Melody
Man
Snooze
Soft
Rap
Low
Nightmare
Door
Horn
Cold
Blanket
Dream
CDs
Nurse
Dark
Steal
Concert
Mountain Doze
Spider
Measure
Queen
Silence
Woman
Recognition Options
Instrument Doctor
Slumber Ready
Composition Apple
Cradle
Candy
Symphony
Music
Snore
Sweet
Echo
Mad
Exhausted
Hard
Jazz
Foot
Nap
Daughter
Tempo
Shoe
Calm
Haystack
Orchestra
Needle
Peace
Thief
Beat
Sing
Weary
Fishing
Art
Fruit
Yawn
Light
Dance
White
Pillow
Bed
Rhythm
River
Drowsy
Window
Saxophone
Table
Relax
Web
Drums
Hot
Quiet
Curtain
Pop
Hill
Futon
Poison
Score
Butter
Alarm
Smooth
False Memories
Related
Recognition
2.5 (1.78)
Recall
1.2 (1.23)
Mean
1.85 (1.63)
Unrelated
0.9 (.738)
0.3 (.483)
0.6 (.681)
Discussion
Mean
1.7(1.56)
.75 (1.02)
Number Correct
Related
Recognition
10.1 (1.85)
Recall
5.6 (1.43)
Mean
7.85(2.81)
Unrelated
9.1 (1.73)
4.3 (2.06)
6.7 (3.07)
Mean
9.6 (1.82)
4.95 (1.85)
Results indicate effects of stimulus type and test type. Stimulus
type (related or unrelated) affected the number of false
memories during the testing, while test type affected the
number of words remembered. This supports the findings by
previous researchers.
Some participants were overwhelmed by the mazes that
were given, but it was not used in the scoring it was just to keep
them busy for three minutes to stop any recency effects.
One participant recalled the word “puppy” after seeing all
words related to music.
..
Mean Number of False
Memories
Mean Number of Items
Remembered
References
Balota, D.,& Neely, J. (1980). Test-expectancy and word frequency effects in recall and
recognition. Journal of experimental Psychology. Human Learning and Memory, 6(5), 576-587
doi:10.1037/0278-7393.6.5.576.
Gallo, D.,McDermott, K., Percer, J., & Roediger, H. (2001). Modality effects in false recall and False
recognition. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(2), 339-353.
Doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.339.
Petrusic, W., & Dillon, R. (1972). Proactive interference in short-term recognition and recall memory.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 95(2), 412-418. Doi:10.1037/h0033663.