Download Final Research Paper - sites@gsu

Running head: SPECIAL MEMORY
Title: Special Memory
Brooke Jackson
Georgia State University
1
SPECIAL MEMORY
2
Title: Special Memory
Memories are interesting, they can bring on positive and negative emotion, they help us
get through life by learning what to do and more importantly what not to do. Researchers have
been studying memory for a long time, some believe that memory is easily distorted and
therefore unreliable, others believe that this distortion can be fixed and we can rely on memory.
The first three articles discussed will show examples of how memory is not always trustworthy
while the three articles following will show that the inconsistencies are fixable and are still
relevant. These findings are particularly important in situations such as eyewitness testimonies,
where many argue that because our memories are susceptible to change we cannot always
depend on memory for accurate testimonies.
The easiest memories to recall are usually ones that relate to feeling a more extreme
emotion, a time of sincere happiness, or intense anger, this first article discusses whether or not
memories are more directly affected by arousal or valence, meaning, is it how much of an
emotion someone is feeling, or the specific emotion that helps one remember. Corson and
Verrier, (2007), did a between subject design experiment testing recall memory of false words by
manipulating the subject’s moods. The mood conditions were positive-mood high arousal
(happy), positive-mood weak arousal (serene), negative-mood high arousal (angry), negativemood weak arousal (sad), and a control group. In order to have the participants fit the mood
condition they were put in, experimenters used mood induction techniques based on music and
guided imagery. Participants were read a lists of words and told to be able to remember as many
of the words as possible. Then students filled out the booklet with the recognition test, containing
60 words listed in a random order. Results of the experiment showed that the effect of mood was
significant, high-arousal groups recalled more than the weak arousal groups, but the positive and
SPECIAL MEMORY
3
negative valence groups did not particularly show any difference. Happy condition group
recalled more critical lures than the serene condition group, and angry condition group recalled
more critical lures than the sad condition group. This study shows that the effect of mood on
false memory is not due to valence of emotion but more so due to arousal.
Researchers Dysart, Lindsay, MacDonald, and Wicke, (2002), questioned validity of
witnesses during lineups while they had been intoxicated during the event. They tested
participant’s ability to recognize a confederate at different levels of intoxication. Two female
recruiters were instructed to approach people at a bar (each recruiter at a different bar) and ask if
they would participate in an experiment. Participants completed a filler task, and then took a
Breathalyzer test to assess blood alcohol level. They were shown a photograph and asked if the
photo was of the recruiter or not and to rate their level of confidence. Subjects emails were taken
down for the second portion, where they would do the same thing but online at a later date.
Results showed that between the low and high blood alcohol level groups neither were more
accurate of identifying when it was the photo of the recruiter, but in cases where participants
were shown a photo of the look-alike, the low blood alcohol level group made the more accurate
decisions. There was no difference when it came to confidence in the answers between these two
groups. This study suggests that intoxication may increase the likelihood of false identification
decisions.
In this third study on memory, researchers were interested in the creation of false
memories. Lindsay, Hagen, Read, Wade, and Garry (2004) conducted an experiment to see if
showing someone a photograph combined with a false narrative could create false memories. To
find more information about this they created a between subject’s design testing the student’s
memories by using two conditions, having a childhood photo or no photo and seeing if they
SPECIAL MEMORY
4
remembered an event that never actually happened. Parents of the students provided a narrative
of two school events and photos corresponding to the school year. The narratives were read
aloud along with a false narrative. Half of the students were given the class photos, and the other
half was not given the photos but only the narratives. After recalling the stories participants filled
out a survey rating how well they remembered the event. One week later students returned to
then recall the event, this time being recorded. Two judges read the recordings and judged
whether the students were under the no image or memory category, images but no memory
category, or memories of putting the toy in the desk category. Findings were that those in the
photo condition reported remembering the event much more than those with just the narrative.
Students truly believed that this pseudo-event had really happened to them and several found it
very hard to believe that the experimenter had made it up because it seemed just as real to them
as the other true memories. This study shows that while under pressure memories can sometimes
be fabricated, and more often when combined with other memory evoking cues such as
photographs.
While knowing the possibilities and realities of how remembering information incorrectly
can negatively influence things such as eyewitness testimony, other researchers looked to prove
that we can fix this phenomenon. Similarly to Corson and Verrier (2007), other researchers were
interested in arousal and memory, while previously discussed we saw that memory was effected
primarily by arousal as opposed to valence. Knowing this information on arousal, English and
Nielson (2010) tested whether it could be useful in situations where memory has already been
distorted. They saw that arousal induced after learning allowed for better long-term retrieval of
episodic details and also allowed better rejection of misinformation. They tested participants by
showing them 4 clips and then took a 15-minute forced choice yes/no questionnaire retention
SPECIAL MEMORY
5
test. For those in the misinformation condition four of the questions were modified to contain
incorrect information. Arousal was then induced to one group by showing a live video of a
surgery and then one week later participants came back to retake the 15 item test. They found
that experiencing brief arousal after witnessing events and incorrect information actually led to
enhanced retrieval of eyewitness memory and reduced the acceptance of misinformation.
Luna and Martin-Luengo (2012) looked into increasing accuracy of this misinformation
effect by adding the plurality option. Participants viewed a slide show of several different
photographs. After being given a filler task they listened to a narrative summary containing
incorrect information and later took a memory test. From this they learned that when participants
are allowed to select the number of answers they want to include the accuracy increases.
Researchers said this information is especially important because it shows potential
metacognition that can be used in a forensic setting. Better testimonies could be obtained if
witnesses are given even some control over their answers.
Oeberst and Blank (2012) wanted to know if the reversal of these misinformation effects
were possible. They performed 3 separate experiments to test their theory. In the first
experiment, students were either in the ignorant-enlightenment or the enlightenment only groups.
They were all shown a clip from a film and then given a filler task. Afterward they listened to a
narrative giving different or incorrect details than seen in the film. Students in the ignorant
enlightenment group were then given a forced choice test deciding between correct details of the
film and the incorrect given in the narrative. They were then enlightened on the purpose of the
study and then given the memory state test. From this they learned that the misinformation effect
was completely eliminated by being enlightened. They tested this further in experiment 2 by
taking away the memory state test, learning that enlightenment on its own was sufficient enough
SPECIAL MEMORY
6
to eliminate the misinformation effect. In the final stage, they waited a 5-week period between
viewing the clips and recalling them and saw that they were still able to completely reverse
misinformation effects after the prolonged period.
The first set of studies show that memory can be unreliable because it is susceptible to
change due to outside influences, but the next set of articles and research show that although
sometimes flawed there are ways to enhance and even reverse the effects and influences that can
change our memories making them still reliable. Corson and Verrier (2007) say that false
memories are induced by arousal while English and Nielson (2010) show in their experiment that
the previous study’s results are inconsistent to other findings. The first experiment makes the
suggestion that arousal causes false memories, while it is seen in the other that arousal briefly
after learning makes for better long-term retrieval and rejection of misinformation. The plurality
option eliminates problems with memory issues seen in target-absent line-ups by allowing the
participant to have more options, including if they are unsure. It also proved effective in an
experimental design incredibly similar to Lindsay et al. (2004), where in a situation containing
visual stimuli, false narratives, and pressure from someone seen as superior were presented the
plurality option eliminated the misinformation effect. At the end of the study students were told
that one of the stories had been fabricated and most were easily able to guess correctly which
narrative was false, if the plurality option had been available results may have been different.
Oeberst and Blank (2012) prove that the memory confusion can even be eliminated after a
prolonged period of time even an unideal situation. These three articles show that memory can be
corrected and still held credible, even in situations like eyewitness testimony.
Running head: SPECIAL MEMORY
7
References
Corson, Y., & Verrier, N. (2007). Emotions and false memories: Valence or arousal?.
Psychological Science, 18(3), 208-211. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01874.x
Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. L., MacDonald, T. K., & Wicke, C. (2002). The intoxicated witness:
Effects of alcohol on identification accuracy from showups. Journal Of Applied
Psychology, 87(1), 170-175. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.170
English, S. M., & Nielson, K. A. (2010). Reduction of the misinformation effect by arousal
induced after learning. Cognition, 117(2), 237-242. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.014
Lindsay, D. S., Hagen, L., Read, J. D., Wade, K. A., & Garry, M. (2004). True photographs and
false memories. Psychological Science, 15(3), 149-154. doi:10.1111/j.09567976.2004.01503002.x
Luna, K., & Martín‐Luengo, B. (2012). Improving the accuracy of eyewitnesses in the presence
of misinformation with the plurality option. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(5), 687693. doi:10.1002/acp.2845
Oeberst, A., & Blank, H. (2012). Undoing suggestive influence on memory: The reversibility of
the eyewitness misinformation effect. Cognition, 125(2), 141-159.
doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.009