Showing posts with label False Memories. Show all posts
Showing posts with label False Memories. Show all posts

Mar 25, 2021

New study finds false memories can be reversed

 Rich false memories of autobiographical events can be planted -- and then reversed, a new paper has found.

The study highlights -- for the first time -- techniques that can correct false recollections without damaging true memories. It is published by researchers from the University of Portsmouth, UK, and the Universities of Hagen and Mainz, Germany.

There is plenty of psychological research which shows that memories are often reconstructed and therefore fallible and malleable. However, this is the first time research has shown that false memories of autobiographical events can be undone.

Studying how memories are created, identified and reversed could be a game changer in police and legal settings, where false memories given as evidence in a courtroom can lead to wrongful convictions.

According to Dr Hartmut Blank, co-author of the research from the University of Portsmouth's Department of Psychology, "believing, or even remembering something that never happened may have severe consequences. In police interrogations or legal proceedings, for instance, it may lead to false confessions or false allegations, and it would be highly desirable, therefore, to reduce the risk of false memories in such settings.

"In this study, we made an important step in this direction by identifying interview techniques that can empower people to retract their false memories."

The researchers recruited 52 participants for a study on 'childhood memories' and with the help of parents, they implanted two false negative memories that definitely didn't happen, but were plausible. For example getting lost, running away or being involved in a car accident.

Along with two true events, which had actually happened, participants were persuaded by their parents that all four events were part of their autobiographical memory.

The participants were then asked to recall each event in multiple interview sessions. By the third session, most believed the false events had happened and -- similar to previous research -- about 40 per cent had developed actual false memories of them.

The researchers then attempted to undo the false memories by using two strategies.

The first involved reminding participants that memories may not always be based on people's own experience, but also on other sources such as a photograph or a family member's narrative. They were then asked about the source of each of the four events.

The second strategy involved explaining to them that being asked to repeatedly recall something can elicit false memories. They were asked to revisit their event memories with this in mind.

The result, according to Dr Blank, was that "by raising participants' awareness of the possibility of false memories, urging them to critically reflect on their recollections and strengthening their trust in their own perspective, we were able to significantly reduce their false memories. Moreover, and importantly, this did not affect their ability to remember true events.

Read more at Science Daily

Apr 8, 2020

False memories of crime appear real when retold to others

People are no better than chance at identifying when someone else is recounting a false or real memory of a crime, according to a new UCL study.

The findings, published in Frontiers in Psychology, build on a previous study that was the first to successfully implant false memories of committing a crime -- involving either assault or assault with a weapon that resulted in police contact.

Study author Dr Julia Shaw (UCL Psychology & Language Sciences) said: "Everyone thinks that they couldn't be tricked into believing they have done something they never did, and that if someone were telling them about a false memory, they would be able to spot it. But we found that actually, people tend to be quite susceptible to having false memories, and they sound just like real memories."

For the previous study, published in 2015, Dr Shaw and a colleague invited young adults into a study about emotional memories, and also spoke with a member of their family to learn about events from the participants' early adolescence, in as much detail as possible.

The researchers spoke to the participants about their past, and used leading questions and suggestive tactics, as well as visualisation techniques to convince the participants that they were helping them recover a forgotten memory -- while in fact they were implanting a false memory that the participant had committed a crime when they were young, such as theft or assault.

"We were essentially doing exactly 'what not to do' when conducting a police interview," explained Dr Shaw.

The 2015 study reported that the majority of participants developed a false memory of committing a crime, and the participants consistently reported that the false memories felt incredibly real.

The current research involves two studies that used videos from the 2015 study, of the study participants recounting their false memories of a crime, which they believed to be real. The new participants watched those videos and were asked if the person was describing an event that actually happened or not.

Participants were only 53% accurate (no better than chance) at identifying false memories of committing a crime. These results were replicated in the second study. Even when participants were explicitly told that one of the memories they watched was false, their judgment was still no better than tossing a coin.

In addition to incorrectly believing false memories to be true, participants were just as likely to watch someone recount a genuine memory, and then misidentify it as false, once the research team told them that some of the videos would feature false memories. In other words, many true memories looked like false memories.

"Legal professionals and police officers need to realise how easy it is to manipulate someone's memories. Judges in particular should never assume that they can tell when someone has a false memory, and should consider the entire process to see if there was any risk of contamination of a defendant or witness' memories," Dr Shaw said.

Read more at Science Daily