Word Frequency Effect in False Memories

Abstract

Fuzzy Trace Theory argues that false memories arise from a weak verbatim memory along with strong encoding of the meaning (gist). The present study simultaneously investigated the effects of the strength of both the gist and the verbatim information on false memories. Exp. 1 was carried out to compare false memories for common and rare words in recall and recognition. In Exp. 2 a control for possible testing effects was added, and participants were given a recognition test with no preceding recall test. Qualitative judgements (Remember vs Know) regarding words judged as old on the recognition test were also collected in Exp. 2. Both experiments showed that false memories were more likely when weak verbatim items occurred along with strong gist (as with common words) than only with weak gist encoding (as with rare words). Moreover, participants were more likely to choose falsely physically similar distractors for rare words than for common words. Semantically similar distractors, on the other hand, were more likely to be selected for common than for rare words. These results provide further support for the fuzzy trace theory explanation of false memories. However, some weaknesses of this model regarding false memories are also discussed.

Fuzzy-trace theory and lifespan cognitive development

“…To illustrate, five manipulations that increase R judgments for presented items are replacing word lists with picture lists (Wagner, Gabrieli, & Verfaellie, 1997), increasing the number of times a list is presented (Dewhurst & Hitch, 1997), replacing longer lists with shorter ones (Rajaram, 1993), replacing lists of high-frequency words with lists of low-frequency words (Guttentag & Carroll, 1997), and testing young adult subjects rather than older adults (Duarte, Graham, & Henson, 2010). When these manipulations have been implemented in false memory experiments, each has lowered false memory (Brainerd, Payne, Wright, & Reyna, 2003; Goz, 2005; Gallo & Roediger, 2003; Schacter et al, 1999; Sugrue & Hayne, 2006). …”

Dual recollection in episodic memory.

“…To illustrate, consider five manipulations whose ability to increase true recollection is well documented: presenting a list of pictures rather than words, repeated presentation of a list, reducing the length of a list, decreasing the linguistic frequency of list words, and testing younger versus older adults. All of these manipulations have also been studied in false memory experiments, and each has been found to reduce false memory (see Brainerd, Payne, Wright, & Reyna, 2003; Duarte, Graham, & Henson, 2010; Gallo & Roediger, 2003; Goz, 2005; Schacter et al, 1999; Sugrue & Hayne, 2006). Now, consider five other manipulations whose ability to increase true recollection is also well documented: generating rather than reading a list, studying list items under longer rather than shorter exposure times, studying an emotionally valenced list rather a neutral one, studying a list under full rather than divided attention, and studying a list under deep rather than shallow encoding instructions.…”

Memory illusions and category malleability: False recognition for goal-derived reorganizations of common categories

“…While found no effects in false recognition from word frequency, Anaki, Faran, Ben-Shalom, and Henik (2005) found that low-frequency lures have more false recognitions than do high-frequency lures. Göz (2005), on the other hand, found that high-frequency lures have higher rates of false recognition than do low-frequency lures. In the present study, we found no significant correlation between false recognition for each type of critical lure and word frequency.…”