Are False Memories More Difficult to Forget Than Accurate Memories?

False memories are hard to inhibit: Differential effects of directed forgetting on accurate and false recall in the DRM procedure

“…In the present experiment, we obtained recall proportions of approximately .24 for studied words and .26 for critical words, following exposure to 8 or 12 lists of 15 words. The present results are comparable to those observed by Seamon et al (2001a), who also used 8 lists of 15 words, and comparable in terms of absolute levels of correct recall to those observed by Toglia et al (1999), as our participants correctly recalled an average of 31 or 36 words following exposure to 120 (8 lists) or 180 (12 lists) words.…”

“…Verbatim traces represent the surface details of physical stimuli, whereas gist traces represent the meaning or theme of the stimuli (see Brainerd & Reyna, 1996, 1998Brainerd, Reyna, & Mojardin, 1999, 2001. In the DRM procedure, researchers have suggested that accurate recall of studied words is driven largely by verbatim traces, whereas false recall of critical words is based predominantly on gist traces that correspond to list themes (e.g., Payne et al, 1996;Seamon et al, 2001a;Toglia, Neuschatz, & Goodwin, 1999). Whereas the implicit activation and source monitoring approaches treat studied and critical words in the 1 An alternative prediction, derived from Underwood's hypothesis and suggested by Charles Brainerd (personal communication), is that directed forgetting instructions could have a greater inhibitory effect on critical words than studied words.…”

The reliability of the DRM paradigm as a measure of individual differences in false memories

“…We note, however, that the research on the persistence of true versus false memories has not revealed consistent differences, especially for recognition memory, which was measured in the present study. Whereas some studies have shown that FAs decline more slowly than hits (Payne et al, 1996;Thapar & McDermott, 2001), other studies have found no difference between FAs and hits (Lampinen & Schwartz, 2000;Neuschatz, Payne, Lampinen, & Toglia, 2001;Seamon et al, 2001), and still others have found that hits are forgotten more slowly than FAs (Brainerd, Wright, Reyna, & Mojardin, 2001). Seamon et al suggest that the difference in the persistence of false and true memories may be diminished with recognition tests because both the studied and the related words are presented, providing equivalent access to the verbatim and the gist traces.…”

“…Other conditions, however, appear to affect true and false memories in an inverse manner. For example, memory for studied items has been shown to worsen with delayed testing, whereas false memories are less likely to fade over time McDermott, 1996;Payne et al, 1996;Toglia et al, 1999), although this difference may depend on whether memory is measured through recall or recognition (Seamon et al, 2001). In addition, multiple study-test trials over a short period of time have been shown to enhance true memories but to decrease the rate of false memories (Kensinger & Schacter, 1999;McDermott, 1996).…”

Can false memories prime alternative solutions to ambiguous problems?

“…Thapar and McDermott (2001; Experiment 1) extended this false memory persistence effect to a delay of one week and Toglia, Neuschatz, and Goodwin (1999; Experiment 2) extended it to three weeks. Others have successfully shown false memory persistence effects using recognition rather than recall [e.g., Howe, Candel, Otgaar, Malone, & Wimmer, 2010 (Experiment 3); Payne, Elie, Blackwell, & Neuschatz, 1996 (Experiment 1); Seamon et al, 2002;Thapar & McDermott, 2001 (Experiment 2)]. The false memory persistence effect is not restricted to adults, but is also evident in research with children [e.g., Brainerd, Reyna, & Brandse, 1995;Experiments 4 and 5)].…”