Implanting false autobiographical memories for repeated events

Abstract

Research to date has exclusively focused on the implantation of false memories for single events. The current experiment is the first proof of concept that false memories can be implanted for repeated autobiographical experiences using an adapted false memory implantation paradigm. We predicted that false memory implantation approaches for repeated events would generate fewer false memories compared to the classic implantation method for single events. We assigned students to one of three implantation conditions in our study: Standard, Repeated, and Gradual. Participants underwent three interview sessions with a 1week interval between sessions. In the Standard condition, we exposed participants to a single-event implantation method in all three interviews. In the Repeated condition, participants underwent a repeated-event implantation method in the three interviews. The Gradual condition also consisted of a repeated-event implantation method, however, in the first interview alone, we suggested to participants that they had experienced the false narrative once. Surprisingly, within our sample, false memories rates in the Standard condition were not higher compared to the Repeated and Gradual conditions. Although sometimes debated, our results imply that false memories for repeated events can be implanted in lab conditions, likely with the same ease as false memories for single events.

A new method to implant false autobiographical memories: Blind implantation.

“…A similar pattern was detected in the belief and recollection ratings that did not statistically differ between the Single and Repeated groups. This result aligns with Calado et al (2021) study showing that implanted false memory rates also did not statistically differ when the suggestion pertained to a single or repeated occurring event.…”

“…Nonetheless, caution should be taken when relating our implantation rates with previous false memory implantation studies. Specifically, in most of these studies, false memories were scored by exclusively focusing on participants' narratives of the events (but see Calado et al, 2021;Otgaar et al, 2013). The issue here is that researchers have sometimes used different scoring methods which might have led to different false memory rates across studies (see, for a discussion, Shaw, 2018; This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

“…Specifically, interviewers need to be well trained for conducting interviews. Also, the scoring of interviews is a complex task and false memory rates can differ depending on the scoring method (e.g., Calado et al, 2021; Shaw, 2018; Wade et al, 2018). Second, in many implantation studies, participants’ parents are asked to verify that the false event was in fact not experienced.…”

“…That is, recently, implanted false memory work has been criticized because this work has exclusively focused on the implantation of single events while child sexual abuse cases oftentimes concern abuse that is perpetrated repeatedly (Blizard & Shaw, 2019; Brewin & Andrews, 2017). Therefore, Calado et al (2021) examined the ease with which false memories for repeated events could be implanted and although it was expected that repeated false events were less likely to be implanted than single event, false repeated events were as easily implanted as those that occurred only once. Taken together, we examined whether this new method would lead to similar rates of false memories as in the standard false memory implantation paradigm and explored the ease of implanted false memories for repeated events.…”

“…Out of all participants, three vouchers of 15 euros were raffled. The sample size belongs to one of the largest among all false memory implantation studies (see Table A1 from Calado et al, 2021). The study was approved by the standing ethical committee of KU Leuven.…”