Context differentiation and remindings in episodic memory updating

Wahlheim, Christopher N.; Garlitch, Sydney M.; Kemp, Paige L.

doi:10.1016/bs.plm.2021.06.001

Cited by 14 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Experiment 1 characterized proactive effects of memory when fake news was retrieved during corrections and subsequently recollected. The patterns showing that successful fake news retrieval during corrections was associated with proactive facilitation when fake news was recollected and proactive interference when fake news was not recollected generalizes earlier findings (for a review, see Wahlheim et al, 2021 ). Experiment 2 examined the stability of those associations by testing whether they would replicate with an updated material set and slightly different experimental conditions.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…However, the account also proposes that prior-event retrieval cued by current event features increases the familiarity of earlier events, which can lead to proactive inference effects when event changes are not subsequently recollected—a type of familiarity backfire. This mixture of effects has been shown consistently across paradigms using stimuli varying in naturalism (for a review, see Wahlheim et al, 2021 ). The generalizability of these findings suggests that whether retrieval of misinformation during corrections impairs or improves subsequent memory for corrections may similarly depend on whether recollection is used at retrieval.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…According to those accounts, memory and belief updating are enabled when misinformation and correct information from two events becomes encoded together with a representation that identifies which details are true. Evidence for integrative encoding in memory paradigms can be inferred from response dependencies showing that updated information is more likely to be recalled accurately when original information is also recalled (for a review, see Wahlheim et al, 2021 ). The present finding showing that recall for real news was more accurate when earlier-retrieved fake news was subsequently recollected is compatible with an integrative encoding account of the proactive facilitation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on previous findings from similar paradigms in the episodic memory updating literature (for a review, see Wahlheim et al, 2021 ), we predicted that recalling fake news details when detecting real news corrections would facilitate memory for real news details when the fake news details could be subsequently recollected as having been corrected. In contrast, we predicted that recalling fake news details when detecting real news corrections would interfere with subsequent memory accuracy when the fake news details could not be subsequently recollected as having been corrected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recalling fake news during real news corrections can impair or enhance memory updating: the role of recollection-based retrieval

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fake news can impair memory leading to societal controversies such as COVID-19 vaccine efficacy. The pernicious influence of fake news is clear when ineffective corrections leave memories outdated. A key theoretical issue is whether people should recall fake news while reading corrections with contradictory details. The familiarity backfire view proposes that recalling fake news increases its familiarity, leading to interference. However, the integrative encoding view proposes that recalling fake news promotes co-activation and binding of contradictory details, leading to facilitation. Two experiments examined if one theory better accounts for memory updating after participants recalled actual fake news details when reading headlines that corrected misinformation. In Phase 1, participants read real and fake news headlines of unclear veracity taken from various internet sources. In Phase 2, participants read real news headlines that reaffirmed real news and corrected fake news from Phase 1. When they detected that Phase 2 real news corrected fake news, they attempted to recall Phase 1 fake news. In Phase 3, participants first recalled real news details. When they remembered that those details were corrections from Phase 2, they attempted to recall fake news from Phase 1. Recalling fake news when noticing corrections in Phase 2 led to better memory for real news in Phase 3 when fake news was recalled again and worse memory for real news in Phase 3 when fake news was not recalled again. Both views explain part of the memory differences associated with recalling fake news during corrections, but only when considering whether people recollected that fake news had been corrected.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recalling fake news during real news corrections can impair or enhance memory updating: the role of recollection-based retrieval

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…List 2 Recall Conditionalized on Change Classifications. Many studies have shown that List 2 recall is especially accurate when changes are recollected (for a review, see Wahlheim et al, 2021). The combination of facilitated recall with more recollected changes following manipulations that increase List 1 recall during List 2 indexes improvements in cross-episode binding.…”

Section: Final Cued Recall Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing can enhance episodic memory updating in younger and older adults.

Kemp,

Loaiza,

Wahlheim

2023

Psychology and Aging

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Older adults sometimes show impaired memory for recent episodes, especially those that are similar but not identical to existing memories. Two experiments examined if interpolated testing between episodes improves recent memories for older and younger adults (N = 60 per group and experiment). Participants studied two lists of cue–response word pairs. Some pairs included the same cue in both lists with changed responses. Between lists, List 1 pairs were tested (Experiments 1 and 2), tested with corrective feedback (Experiment 1 only), or restudied (Experiment 2 only). On a final cued recall test, participants attempted to recall the List 2 response, indicated if responses had changed between lists, and if so, attempted to recall the List 1 response. List 2 recalls for changed pairs operationalized episodic memory updating. Older adults showed poorer List 2 recall than younger adults. But both age groups showed improved List 2 recall following interpolated testing with or without feedback compared to no-test and restudy contrast conditions. This so-called forward testing effect was accompanied by improved memory for responses having changed across lists. These results contrast with the inhibitory deficit proposal that older adults should be more interference prone than younger adults when competing responses are more accessible during encoding. These findings are more compatible with the view that retrieval practice of competing responses can support the encoding of cross-episode associations and potentially mitigate interference, thus improving age-related associative memory deficits.

show abstract