错误记忆研究范式评介

文章概括评介了当前错误记忆研究的几种主要范式及其各自可能的认知机制。联想研究范式(包括集中联想研究范式与类别联想研究范式)和无意识知觉范式描述了人们对单词的错误记忆,而误导信息干扰范式和KK研究范式则描述了人们对持续事件的错误记忆。这两类不同的研究范式证实了可能存在不同类型的错误记忆,且可能具有不同的认知加工机制。它们都从一定层面上揭示了错误记忆现象的本质和特征,并为人们进行更深入的研究提供了有效的方法。     

情绪对错误记忆的影响及其应用启示

与真实记忆一样,错误记忆也会受到情绪的影响,这主要表现在以下几个方面：（1）在正性心境下,个体会有更多的错误记忆;（2）个体对负性刺激更易产生错误记忆;（3）错误记忆存在着心境一致性效应。这些研究结果在临床治疗和司法鉴定等方面给了我们重要的启示：（1）避免心境一致性效应;（2）根据心境状态选择恰当的提问方式;（3）移植负性错误记忆治疗成瘾行为;（4）根据情绪体验辨别记忆的真伪。未来的研究在深入探讨情绪影响错误记忆的理论机制的同时,可以立足于两者的交互作用进行更多应用性的研究,以扩大其现实意义。     

盲生错误记忆和真实记忆研究

错误记忆指的是人们会回忆或再认那些没有出现过的事件。目前,针对错误记忆的研究多集中于视力正常的人群。国外近年来有针对视障人群错误记忆的研究认为,在听觉学习情境中视障成人有更好的真实记忆和更低的错误记忆。目前对于盲生的错误记忆特征尚缺乏研究。而盲文摸读作为视障人群重要的学习方式,其对视障人群的真实记忆和错误记忆的影响尚未有研究者关注。本研究以初中盲生和视力正常学生作为研究对象,采用DRM范式,发现被试采用阅读学习(盲生摸读盲文,视力正常学生阅读屏幕文字)和听觉学习两种学习方式下,都发现被试身上存在稳定的错误记忆;盲生的错误记忆显著低于视力正常学生。在摸读学习方式下,盲生真实记忆好于听觉学习方式。     

错误记忆的来源：编码阶段／保持阶段

错误记忆是人们对未经验过事件或未学过单词的记忆。研究表明,不同实验室研究范式下引发的错误记忆在来源阶段上存在差异。本研究通过同时操纵预警提示和时间间隔两个因素来探讨错误记忆的来源问题。结果发现:关联性错误记忆出现预警效应,但不具有时间效应;误导性错误记忆则恰好相反。可见,关联性错误记忆可能主要发生在编码阶段,而误导性错误记忆则可能主要发生在保持阶段。     

4岁儿童对他人记忆的评判与错误信念理解的关系

从观点采择的角度考察儿童对他人记忆的评判及其与错误信念理解的关系。与他人分享记忆时,个体需要同时处理自我与他人对过去的表征和看法;而要顺利完成错误信念任务,个体需要同时加工自我的真实信念与他人的错误信念。因此个体对他人记忆的评判能力可能会与其对错误信念的理解相关。40名4岁儿童完成一系列错误信念任务和评判他人记忆是否正确任务,情境包括视觉、意图解释和情绪解释。结果表明,控制年龄、语言和记忆能力等因素后,被试评判他人记忆的成绩仍然可以预测其对错误信念的理解。这些结果为幼儿在回忆叙述中谈及他人越多,其心理理论越好提供了进一步的证据和可能的解释     

依恋安全对自传记忆提取现象学特征的影响

个体在回忆自传记忆时的主观体验特征称为自传记忆的现象学特征,而这种个体精神现象学特征的早期推动是个体依恋特征。研究采用依恋故事阅读启动范式,探讨依恋安全对自传记忆现象学特征提取的影响。研究结果显示,安全依恋启动组自传记忆的可得性、具体性、清晰性、生动性和关系自我构念显著高于不安全依恋启动组,且关系自我构念在依恋安全与自传记忆现象学特征之间起中介作用。研究从新的角度表明,依恋真实地生活在复杂的人际关系中,建构着个体关系自我构念,并真切影响着自传记忆现象学特征,积蓄着个体精神现象学特征的形成。     

道德情绪：道德行为的中介调节

道德情绪是心理学的一个重要研究主题。道德情绪是个体根据一定的道德标准评价自己或他人的行为和思想时所产生的一种情绪体验。它是一种复合情绪, 主要包括厌恶、移情、内疚, 羞耻等。道德情绪影响下人类会产生某些典型行为, 这主要包括道德洁净行为和道德补偿行为。心理学研究道德情绪的实验范式很多, 主要有行为回忆范式、实物或图片刺激范式、情境设置范式等。有关道德情绪的未来研究主要应注重于探讨正性道德情绪在道德发展中的作用, 探讨道德情绪对群体行为的影响, 以及探讨道德情绪在不同文化背景下的价值意义。     

物理线索缺失下的错误记忆

本研究采用基于语义关联的DRM范式,通过改变测试词语的字体来探究语义痕迹和物理线索对错误记忆的影响。结果表明,语义关联产生的要义痕迹依然是错误记忆产生的重要因素,而对物理线索的操作则使真实记忆和错误记忆发生了分离,在字体改变的条件下,被试的错误记忆更加严重。     

间隔时间及记忆负荷对信息缺失错误记忆的影响

现场中的信息缺失会影响人类对事件的记忆,这对证人证言研究是非常重要的,但以往对之却鲜有研究.本研究以大学生为被试,运用信息缺失范式,采用视频录像材料,通过2个实验探讨了间隔时间和记忆负荷对错误记忆的影响.结果表明:(1)间隔时间没有影响真实记忆和错误记忆,但信心水平却随着间隔时间的延长而变化;(2)记忆负荷高低没有影响真实记忆却影响了错误记忆,在关键信息呈现条件下,降低记忆负荷可以减少错误记忆的发生;(3)信息性质会影响人们的记忆,关键信息呈现条件下的错误记忆和真实记忆均高于关键信息缺失的条件.     

禀赋效应的心理机制及其影响因素

禀赋效应是指个体在拥有某物品时对该物品的估价高于没有拥有该物品时的估价的现象。这一现象在行为经济学中普遍存在。禀赋效应的研究范式包括经典研究范式与物物交换范式。禀赋效应的心理机制主要包括损失规避与查询理论。禀赋效应的影响因素主要包括认知角度、动机、情绪、交易物品的特征、研究设计的选择等。未来的研究需要从禀赋效应的适用条件、产生根源、研究范式的改进等方面进一步探讨。     

The origin of children's implanted false memories: Memory traces or compliance?

A longstanding question in false memory research is whether children's implanted false memories represent actual memory traces or merely result from compliance. The current study examined this question using a response latency based deception task. Forty-five 8-year-old children received narratives about a true (first day at school) and false event (hot air balloon ride). Across two interviews, 58/32% of the participants developed a partial/full false memory. Interestingly, these children also showed higher false recall on an unrelated DRM paradigm compared to children without a false memory. The crucial finding, however, was that the results of the deception task revealed that children with partial and full false memories were faster to confirm than to deny statements relating to the false event. This indicates that children's implanted false memories reflect actual memory traces, and are unlikely to be explained by mere compliance.     

The potential effects of the implanted memory paradigm on child subjects

The purpose of this article is to examine the appropriate use of the implanted memory paradigm with children. In this paradigm, participants are asked repeatedly about fictitious events that never transpired. The responses of children in these investigations demonstrate clearly that they can be led to unintentionally create false memories. This article addresses whether memory research should continue to encourage children to create memories for events that never happened. The literature in other areas of psychology suggests that deception may lessen respect for authority, affect a child's self-esteem, and create stress. We propose that the use of the implanted memory paradigm be suspended indefinitely or until appropriate research demonstrates that the paradigm does not affect children negatively. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Implanting rich autobiographical false memories: Meta–analysis for forensic practice and judicial judgment making

ObjectiveThe implanting of rich autobiographical false memories is crucial for judicial decision–making, and the forensic evaluation of a testimony. In order to assess this issue, a meta–analytical review of the probability of implanting rich autobiographical false memories was performed.MethodA total of 30 primary studies analysing the probability of implanting rich autobiographical false memories were retrieved. Random–effects meta–analyses correcting the effect size for sampling error were performed.ResultsThe results revealed a significant, positive, generalizable (the lower limit for the 80% credibility value was d = 1.13), and more than large mean effect size (d = 1.43[1.33, 1.53]) for the implanting of false memory. The moderating effects of stimulus type showed that the effect of the probability of implanted false memory was significantly higher in experienced events (d = 2.03[1.63, 2.43]) than in false narratives (d = 1.35[1.23, 1.47]), and in doctored photographs (d = 1.29[1.06, 1.52]). A similar effect for memory implantation was observed in both the underage (d = 1.44[1.29, 1.59]), and in adults (d = 1.36[1.22, 1.50]). The moderator techniques for implanting false memories revealed a significantly lower probability of implanting false rich memory with non–directive instructions (d = 0.90[0.53, 1.27]) than with guided imagery (d = 1.45[1.32, 1.58]), or with pressure to answer (d = 1.56[1.17, 1.95]) instructions. The event emotional valence moderator exhibited the same effect for positive (d = 1.27[1.09, 1.45]) and negative valence events (d = 1.30[1.17, 1.43]).ConclusionsThe implications of the results for forensic testimony evaluation, police interrogations, and judicial cross–examination are discussed.     

Attentional responses on an auditory oddball predict false memory susceptibility

Attention and memory are highly integrated processes. Building on prior behavioral investigations, this study assesses the link between individual differences in low-level neural attentional responding and false memory susceptibility on the misinformation effect, a paradigm in which false event memories are induced via misleading post-event information. Twenty-four subjects completed the misinformation effect paradigm after which high-density (256-channel) EEG data was collected as they engaged in an auditory oddball task. Temporal-spatial decomposition was used to extract two attention-related components from the oddball data, the P3b and Classic Slow Wave. The P3b was utilized as an index of individual differences in salient target attentional responding while the slow wave was adopted as an index of variability in task-level sustained attention. Analyses of these components show a significant negative relationship between slow-wave responses to oddball non-targets and perceptual false memory endorsements, suggestive of a link between individual differences in levels of sustained attention and false memory susceptibility. These findings provide the first demonstrated link between individual differences in basic attentional responses and false memory. These results support prior behavioral work linking attention and false memory and highlight the integration between attentional processes and real-world episodic memory.     

The reliability of the DRM paradigm as a measure of individual differences in false memories

Despite considerable research on the Deese—Roediger-McDermott (DRM) false memory paradigm, little attention has been paid to the reliability of the paradigm as a measure of individual differences. In the present research, we examined the reliability of the DRM paradigm in a 2-week test-retest design. This analysis showed that the false memories produced in the paradigm were quite stable across the 2-week period and that this stability had both global (cross-list) and list-specific components. In contrast, correct memories showed only global stability across the testing period.     

Neural correlates underlying true and false associative memories

Despite the fact that associative memory studies produce a large number of false memories, neuroimaging analyses utilizing this paradigm typically focus only on neural activity mediating successful retrieval. The current study sought to expand on this prior research by examining the neural basis of both true and false associative memories. Though associative false memories are substantially different than those found in semantic or perceptual false memory paradigms, results suggest that associative false memories are mediated by similar neural mechanisms. Specifically, we found increased frontal activity that likely represents enhanced monitoring and evaluation compared to that needed for true memories and correct rejections. Results also indicated that true, and not false associative memories, are mediated by neural activity in the MTL, specifically the hippocampus. Finally, while activity in early visual cortex distinguished true from false memories, a lack of neural differences between hits and correct rejections failed to support previous findings suggesting that activity in early visual cortex represents sensory reactivation of encoding-related processing.     

Working memory affects false memory production for emotional events

Whereas a link between working memory (WM) and memory distortions has been demonstrated, its influence on emotional false memories is unclear. In two experiments, a verbal WM task and a false memory paradigm for negative, positive or neutral events were employed. In Experiment 1, we investigated individual differences in verbal WM and found that the interaction between valence and WM predicted false recognition, with negative and positive material protecting high WM individuals against false remembering; the beneficial effect of negative material disappeared in low WM participants. In Experiment 2, we lowered the WM capacity of half of the participants with a double task request, which led to an overall increase in false memories; furthermore, consistent with Experiment 1, the increase in negative false memories was larger than that of neutral or positive ones. It is concluded that WM plays a critical role in determining false memory production, specifically influencing the processing of negative material.     

Who is susceptible in three false memory tasks?

ABSTRACT

Decades of research show that people are susceptible to developing false memories. But if they do so in one task, are they likely to do so in a different one? The answer: “No”. In the current research, a large number of participants took part in three well-established false memory paradigms (a misinformation task, the Deese-Roediger-McDermott [DRM] list learning paradigm, and an imagination inflation exercise) as well as completed several individual difference measures. Results indicate that many correlations between false memory variables in all three inter-paradigm comparisons are null, though some small, positive, significant correlations emerged. Moreover, very few individual difference variables significantly correlated with false memories, and any significant correlations were rather small. It seems likely, therefore, that there is no false memory “trait”. In other words, no one type of person seems especially prone, or especially resilient, to the ubiquity of memory distortion.     

Can false memories be corrected by feedback in the DRM paradigm?

Normal processes of comprehension frequently yield false memories as an unwanted by-product. The simple paradigm now known as the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm takes advantage of this fact and has been used to reliably produce false memory for laboratory study. Among the findings from past research is the difficulty of preventing false memories in this paradigm. The purpose of the present experiments was to examine the effectiveness of feedback in correcting false memories. Two experiments were conducted, in which participants recalled DRM lists and either received feedback on their performance or did not. A subsequent recall test was administered to assess the effect of feedback. The results showed promising effects of feedback: Feedback enhanced both error correction and the propagation of correct recall. The data replicated other data of studies that have shown substantial error perseveration following feedback. These data also provide new information on the occurrence of errors following feedback. The results are discussed in terms of the activation-monitoring theory of false memory.