The incidence of false memories in native and non-native speakers

Abstract

The current study consisted of four experiments that utilised a novel approach to investigating false memories. Each of the experiments in the current study investigated individuals with varying experience with different languages. Experiment 1 tested participants in both their native and secondary languages as well as monolingual English speakers, while Experiment 2 assessed native Spanish speakers using both English and Spanish associative lists. Experiment 3 examined the illusory memories in monolingual Spanish speakers in both English and Spanish, while Experiment 4 investigated false memories in monolingual English speakers in both English and Spanish. Results indicated that memory for list items and critical lures was greatest when the lists were presented in the participants' primary language. Results can be explained by either activation-based or fuzzy-trace theories.

Normative data for Italian Deese/Roediger–McDermott lists

“…The DRM paradigm has been limited to English-speaking participants, with few studies examining illusory memories in other languages (for exceptions, see Anastasi, De Leon, & Rhodes, 2005;Anastasi, Rhodes, Marquez, & Velino, 2005;Pérez-Mata, Read, & Diges, 2002;Zeelenberg & Pecher, 2002). Pérez-Mata et al tested Spanish speakers using associative Spanish lists.…”

Normative data for semantically associated Spanish word lists that create false memories

“…To our knowledge, the DRM paradigm has been almost exclusively limited to English-speaking participants, with relatively few studies examining illusory memories in other languages (for exceptions, see Anastasi, Rhodes, Marquez, & Velino, 2005;Pérez-Mata, Read, & Diges, 2002;Zeelenberg & Pecher, 2002;Zeelenberg, Plomp, & Raaijmakers, 2003). Pérez-Mata et al tested Spanish speakers in their second experiment, using associative Spanish lists.…”

“…Specifically, the associative strength of the lists may have been weakened, since the associations inherent in the translated lists were based on norms from native English-speaking participants. Anastasi et al (2005) corrected this problem in subsequent experiments by creating six new associative lists based on responses from native Spanish speakers, rather than using direct translations.…”

“…Zeelenberg and Pecher presented participants with items from the DRM lists that had been directly translated into Dutch. Anastasi et al (2005) used a similar method in their Experiment 1 by directly translating six of the DRM lists into Spanish, Japanese, and German in order to test foreign exchange students in their native language. As was noted by Anastasi et al (2005), one problem with this method is that the lists may have had greater associative strength in English, the language in which they were originally developed, than in the language into which they were translated.…”

“…Anastasi et al (2005) used a similar method in their Experiment 1 by directly translating six of the DRM lists into Spanish, Japanese, and German in order to test foreign exchange students in their native language. As was noted by Anastasi et al (2005), one problem with this method is that the lists may have had greater associative strength in English, the language in which they were originally developed, than in the language into which they were translated. Specifically, the associative strength of the lists may have been weakened, since the associations inherent in the translated lists were based on norms from native English-speaking participants.…”