Literature DB >> 16933764

Ripple effects in memory: judgments of moral blame can distort memory for events.

David A Pizarro1, Cara Laney, Erin K Morris, Elizabeth F Loftus.   

Abstract

Can judging an individual as being morally responsible for a negative act affect memory for details of the act? We presented participants with a story describing an individual (Frank) who committed a crime (he walked out on a restaurant bill). Some participants were told that the negative act was not intentional and that Frank was essentially a good person. Others were told that the negative act was intentional and that Frank actually enjoyed it. Control participants were given no extra information. All the participants then judged Frank's moral responsibility for walking out on the bill. When asked a week later to recall information about the event, the participants who had received negative information about Frank remembered that Frank had walked out on a larger restaurant bill than he actually had. Moreover, the degree of memory distortion was predicted by the degree of moral blame that had been attributed to Frank.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16933764     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193578

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  8 in total

1.  The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.

Authors:  J Haidt
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Halo and devil effects demonstrate valenced-based influences on source-monitoring decisions.

Authors:  Gabriel I Cook; Richard L Marsh; Jason L Hicks
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2003-06

Review 3.  The case for motivated reasoning.

Authors:  Z Kunda
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Creating false memories.

Authors:  E F Loftus
Journal:  Sci Am       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.142

Review 5.  Culpable control and the psychology of blame.

Authors:  M D Alicke
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 17.737

6.  Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog?

Authors:  J Haidt; S H Koller; M G Dias
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1993-10

Review 7.  The correspondence bias.

Authors:  D T Gilbert; P S Malone
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 17.737

8.  Differential construal and the false consensus effect.

Authors:  T Gilovich
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1990-10
  8 in total
  7 in total

1.  The influence of prior record on moral judgment.

Authors:  Dorit Kliemann; Liane Young; Jonathan Scholz; Rebecca Saxe
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2008-06-20       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Becoming a better person: temporal remoteness biases autobiographical memories for moral events.

Authors:  Jessica R Escobedo; Ralph Adolphs
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2010-08

3.  Behavioral Genetics and Attributions of Moral Responsibility.

Authors:  Kathryn Tabb; Matthew S Lebowitz; Paul S Appelbaum
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 2.805

4.  Perceived intent motivates people to magnify observed harms.

Authors:  Daniel L Ames; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Intentional harms are worse, even when they're not.

Authors:  Daniel L Ames; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-07-22

6.  Asymmetric memory for harming versus being harmed.

Authors:  Chelsea Helion; Erik G Helzer; Suzie Kim; David A Pizarro
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2019-10-07

7.  Enhanced Memory for Fair-Related Faces and the Role of Trait Anxiety.

Authors:  Gewnhi Park; Benjamin U Marsh; Elisha J Johnson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-04-16
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.