Literature DB >> 22003267

How Does Distinctive Processing Reduce False Recall?

R Reed Hunt1, Rebekah E Smith, Kathryn R Dunlap.   

Abstract

False memories arising from associatively related lists are a robust phenomenon that resists many efforts to prevent it. However, a few variables have been shown to reduce this form of false memory. Explanations for how the reduction is accomplished have focused on either output monitoring processes or constraints on access, but neither idea alone is sufficient to explain extant data. Our research was driven by a framework that distinguishes item-based and event-based distinctive processing to account for the effects of different variables on both correct recall of study list items and false recall. We report the results of three experiments examining the effect of a deep orienting task and the effect of visual presentation of study items, both of which have been shown to reduce false recall. The experiments replicate those previous findings and add important new information about the effect of the variables on a recall test that eliminates the need for monitoring. The results clearly indicate that both post-access monitoring and constraints on access contribute to reductions in false memories. The results also showed that the manipulations of study modality and orienting task had different effects on correct and false recall, a pattern that was predicted by the item-based/event-based distinctive processing framework.

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 22003267      PMCID: PMC3190239          DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2011.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mem Lang        ISSN: 0749-596X            Impact factor:   3.059


  26 in total

1.  Conjoint recognition and phantom recollection.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; R Wright; V F Reyna; A H Mojardin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  The effects of a levels-of-processing manipulation on false recall.

Authors:  M G Rhodes; J S Anastasi
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-03

3.  False recall and false recognition induced by presentation of associated words: effects of retention interval and level of processing.

Authors:  A Thapar; K B McDermott
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-04

4.  Adult age differences in distinctive processing: the modality effect on false recall.

Authors:  Rebekah E Smith; Jeffrey P Lozito; Ute J Bayen
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2005-09

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

Authors:  Melissa D McConnell; R Reed Hunt
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-07

6.  Modes of cognitive control in recognition and source memory: depth of retrieval.

Authors:  Larry L Jacoby; Yujiro Shimizu; Karen A Daniels; Matthew G Rhodes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-10

7.  From a passing thought to a false memory in 2 minutes: Confusing real and illusory events.

Authors:  J D Read
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-03

8.  Influences of intentional and unintentional forgetting on false memories.

Authors:  Daniel R Kimball; Robert A Bjork
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2002-03

9.  On the dual effects of repetition on false recognition.

Authors:  A S Benjamin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  "If I had said it I would have remembered it": reducing false memories with a distinctiveness heuristic.

Authors:  C S Dodson; D L Schacter
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03
View more
  14 in total

1.  Distinctive encoding of a subset of DRM lists yields not only benefits, but also costs and spillovers.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; Glen E Bodner; Matthew R Gretz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2019-08-28

2.  Item-specific processing reduces false recognition in older and younger adults: Separating encoding and retrieval using signal detection and the diffusion model.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; Andrew J Aschenbrenner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-11

3.  How Distinctive Processing Enhances Hits and Reduces False Alarms.

Authors:  R Reed Hunt; Rebekah E Smith
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  List blocking and longer retention intervals reveal an influence of gist processing for lexically ambiguous critical lures.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; Jaimie McNabb; Keith A Hutchison
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-11

5.  The Effects of Interspersed Retrieval Practice in Multiple-List Learning on Initially Studied Material.

Authors:  Oliver Kliegl; Verena M Kriechbaum; Karl-Heinz T Bäuml
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-05-06

6.  Category cued recall evokes a generate-recognize retrieval process.

Authors:  R Reed Hunt; Rebekah E Smith; Jeffrey P Toth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Why do pictures, but not visual words, reduce older adults' false memories?

Authors:  Rebekah E Smith; R Reed Hunt; Kathryn R Dunlap
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2015-07-27

8.  All varieties of encoding variability are not created equal: Separating variable processing from variable tasks.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; Glen E Bodner
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 3.059

9.  When do pictures reduce false memory?

Authors:  Rebekah E Smith; R Reed Hunt
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-05

10.  Effects of distinctive encoding on correct and false memory: a meta-analytic review of costs and benefits and their origins in the DRM paradigm.

Authors:  Mark J Huff; Glen E Bodner; Jonathan M Fawcett
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.