PSYC 310 1st Edition Lecture 13Outline of Last Lecture I. Everyday Memory & Memory ErrorsII. Autobiographical MemoryIII. Reminiscence BumpIV. Flashbulb MemoriesV. The Constructive Nature of MemoriesVI. Source MonitoringOutline of Current Lecture I. Schemas & ScriptsII. Construction of MemoriesIII. Power of SuggestionIV. False MemoriesV. Errors in Eyewitness TestimoniesVI. What is Being Done?Current LectureI. Schemas & Scriptsa. Schema: knowledge about what is involved in a particular experiencei. Post office, ball game, classroomb. Script: conception of a sequence of actions that occur during a particular experiencei. Going to a restaurant; to the dentistc. Schemas and scripts influence memoryi. Memory can include information not actually experienced but inferred because it is expected and consistent with the schemaii. Office waiting room: books not present but mentioned in memory taskThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.iii. The constructive nature of memory can lead to errors or “false memories”II. Construction of Memoriesa. Advantagesi. Allows us to “fill in the blanks”ii. Cognition is creative1. Understand language2. Solve problems3. Make decisionsiii. Disadvantages1. Sometimes we make errors2. Sometimes we misattribute the source of informationa. Was it actually presented or did we infer it?III. Power of Suggestiona. Misinformation Effect: misleading information presented after a person witnesses an event can change how that person describes the event lateri. Misleading post-event information (MPI)b. Loftus et al. (1975)i. See slides of traffic accident with stop signii. Introduce MPU: Ask a question about what happened at the yield signiii. Participants remember what they heard (yield sign) not what they saw (stop sign)c. Loftus & Palmer (1974)i. How fast were the cars going when they smashed/hit each other?ii. Those hearing “smashed” (41 mph) said the cars were going faster than those who heard “hit” (34 mph)d. Three hypotheses about the misinformation effect:i. Memory trace replacement hypothesis1. MPI impairs or replaces memories that were formed during original eventii. Retroactive Interference1. More recent learning interferes with memory for something inthe past2. Original memory trace is not replacediii. Source monitoring error1. Failure to distinguish the source of the information2. MPI is misattributed to the original sourceiv. Lindsey (1990)1. Heard a story; two days later again with some details changed2. Told to ignore changes3. Same voice for both stories created source monitoring errors4. Changing voice (female to male) between stories did not create as many errorsIV. False Memoriesa. Hyman and coworkers (1995)i. Participants’ parents gave descriptions of childhood experiencesii. Participant had conversation about experience with experimenter; experimenter added new eventsiii. When discussing it later, participant “remembered” the false events as actually happeningV. Errors in Eyewitness Testimoniesa. Testimony by an eyewitness to a crime about what he or she saw during the crimeb. One of the most convincing types of evidence to a juryi. Assume that people see and remember accuratelyc. But, like other memory, eyewitness testimony can be inaccuratei. Mistaken identityii. Constructive nature of memoryd. Wells & Bradfeild (1998)i. Participants view security videotape with gunman in view for 8 secondsii. Shown a collection of “suspect” photographs afterward and asked if any were the gunmaniii. The actual gunman’s picture was not presentediv. Everyone identified someone as the gunman from photographs afterwardse. Errors due to attention and arousali. Low: attend to irrelevant informationii. High: focus too narrowly (ex: weapon)iii. Moderate: best for being aware of relevant informationf. Errors due to familiarityi. Witness may pick perp out of a lineup because she/he looks familiarii. Source monitoringg. Errors due to suggestioni. Suggestive questioning1. “Which of these people was the assailant?”2. Misinformation effectii. Confirming feedback increases reported confidence laterh. Confidence in one’s memories may be increased by postevent questioningi. May make memories easier to retrievej. However, postevent questioning can also make the misinformation effect strongeri. When info is retrieved, the memory becomes vulnerableii. If misinformation is introduced here, it is more likely to effect recall lateriii. “Reverse testing effect” (Chan et al., 2009)VI. What is Being Done?a. Inform witness perpetrator might not be in lineupb. Use “fillers” in lineup similar to suspectc. Use sequential presentation (not simultaneous)i. This might need to be reversedd. Improve interviewing techniquesi. Cognitive interviewe. Can be an issue with memories of childhood abuse as welli. “Trauma-memory oriented therapists”ii. Potentially facilitate false memory formationiii. At this point, still difficult to determine whether someone is experiencing a real or false memoryiv. However, we can take steps to minimize influence of others (leading questions, suggestion, etc.) on our