Cognitive psychology: Case study 2: Formation of false memories

Cognitive psychology

Case study 2: The formation of false memories

Authors: Elizabeth Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell (1995)

Key term: False memories

Approach:Cognitive psychology

A False memory is possible when false information about the event after the memory manipulates and changes the original memory, making the person believe the false information about that memory even though it's fake. 

Aim/Hypothesis: To discover if it is possible to implant a false memory in someone's brain, although it never happened. 

Method: Experiment with self-report (semi-structured) interviews.

Self report is when someone provides details about him or herself (e.g questionnaire)

Variables

• Independent variable: 3 stages of booklet completion, interview 1 and interview 2. (Time interval between the three IVs were abandoned because participants were unavailable). 
• Dependent variable:

1. Percentage of participants who recalled the true and false events at all three stages
2. Ratings of clarity of memory ( 1 to 10 - 1 being not clear at all, 10 being extremely clear)
3. Ratings of confidence to recall more detail ( 1 to 5 - 1 being not confident, 5 being extremely confident

Design: Repeated measures because all participants had to complete all conditions of the independent variable (booklet, interview 1 and interview 2)

Participants: 24 participants (21 female, 3 male) aged 21-53 years.

Sampling technique: The participants were all recruited by University of Washington students, which makes it an opportunity sample.

An Opportunity sample is people recruited from an opportunity where participants are easy to find and available (e.g a study on korean kids at Korean International School)

Experimenters: Two students from University of Washington who recruited participants and conducted the interviews.

Apparatus: Five page booklet with 4 short stories, 3 true (given by family relatives) and one false (about getting lost in a mall). Each story was a paragraph long and had space below for the participants to write details he remembers about the memory. 

Control: 

• All stories were a paragraph long.
• The false story was the third in the booklet
• The false "lost in the mall" story was aided by a family relative who gave true features to make the story seem more realistic; where the family usually went shopping, who the participant shopped with, shops that would attract interest to the participant.
• The relative had to confirm the participant had never actually gotten lost in a mall
• The false story also contained the same lies; the participant was lost for an extended period, cried, lost in the mall at around 5 years old, found by an elderly woman and reunited with their family

Procedure

1. Interview with relative to get three true stories about the participant that happened when he was 4-6 and details to write a false event. 
2. Participants sent booklet to fill in any memories they had about the four events.
3. Researches conduct interview 1 at University of Washington (or over the phone) one or two weeks after the participants completed the booklet.
4. Researchers conducted Interview 2 at University (or over phone) one or two weeks ago first interview. 
5. Researchers asked participants to recall as much as they could about each event, and add as much detail as possible. 
6. Participants asked to rate clarity of memory (1-10) and confidence of recalling more future detail (1-5).
7. Participants told that the experiment was to try and implant a false memory and apologized for decepting them.

Data: 

• Quantitative data - Percentage of recall, Clarity and confidence ratings
• Qualitative data - The participants descriptions of the memories in the booklet

Results

1. 49/72 of the true stories were recalled in the booklet, interview 1 and interview 2. (68%)
2. 7/24 (29%) of the participants recalled the false event in the booklet, but at the interview two participants changed their mind and said they had no recollection of the false event. 
3. 5/24 participants recalled the false event  in Interview 1 and interview 2.
4. The mean clarity rating for the true events for Interview 1 and 2 was 6.3/10.
5. The clarity rating of the false event at interview 1 was 2.8/10.
6. The clarity rating of the false event at interview 2 was 3.6/10.
7. Participants who believed the false event happened at the first interview were asked their confidence rating. The confidence rating for the true events at interview 1 was 2.7/5.
8. The confidence rating for the true events at interview 2 was 2.2/5.
9. The confidence rating for the false event at interview 1 was 1.8/5.
10. The confidence rating for the false event at interview 2 was 1.4/5.
11. Participants wrote more words to describe true events (mean 138 words) than the false events (mean 50 words).
12. 5/24 participants believed the false event was true.

Conclusion:  People can be made to believe false events happened to them. Memory can be altered, just by suggestion.