Memory Fallibility, False Memories, and Experimental Design

Introduction: Why Memory Matters

Memories are an important part of the human experience. They help us define who we are, based on our past experiences, the people we have met, the places we have been, and the things we have done. Yet there is much that we take for granted about memories, and they are often misunderstood. Consider, for example, criminal trials, where testimony is given on the basis of what people remember about an incident. This is just one example of how we rely on memories, but such examples exist throughout human society.

The problem is that memories are not perfect. They are sometimes inaccurate — we remember things differently from how they occurred, we confuse time frames, and over time it becomes more difficult to remember specific details. Psychologists have dedicated a substantial amount of study to memory, examining the different factors that influence memory formation, retention, and recall. Consider that the cells in our brain tissue are constantly regenerating — in that process, information must be transmitted from one cell to another, lest a memory die when a cell does. Passing this information along over time leads to imperfect memories, and a number of factors influence this process. This paper describes some of those factors. A proposed experiment to investigate memory is outlined in the second section.

Schacter's Seven Sins of Memory

Schacter (1999) outlined his seven sins of memory — different ways in which memory is fallible: transience, absent-mindedness, blocking, misattribution, suggestibility, bias, and persistence. He categorizes these into three types: forgetting, distortions, and intrusive recollections. Among the forgetting type is absent-mindedness, which occurs when the processing of new information is relatively shallow, such that the information is not retained well in memory. Misattribution is one of the distortion sins, in which the source of information is remembered incorrectly — for example, thinking that a spouse said something when it was actually a parent, or mistakenly attributing an action to one person when it was carried out by another.

A practical example of working with memory to address absent-mindedness is instructive. A great deal of new information is processed at any given moment, but the mind is not typically committed to retaining all of it. If someone were asked to recall what their barista from the previous Monday looked like, they would be unlikely to remember. Only if there had been a specific reason to commit that information to memory would they do so. Absent-mindedness becomes a meaningful problem when the forgotten information is something that should have been remembered.

A clear example is someone who says they never remember people's names. Most people make at least a short-term effort to remember the names of those they have just met. But someone who cannot recall the name of a person they met at the same party just a few minutes earlier is experiencing absent-mindedness — that person's name was never fully committed to memory and is therefore unavailable for recall. Overcoming absent-mindedness to improve social skills would be a valuable application of a better understanding of how this particular memory failure operates.

False Memories and Misattribution

Loftus and Pickrell (1995) discuss false memories as a form of misattribution. Their experiment found that a fairly high percentage of participants misremembered what they had witnessed after being given false information. These findings have important real-world implications wherever the use of memories is required. In criminal proceedings, people's recollections of events are used to prosecute cases, and imperfect memory puts this process at significant risk.

The "lost in the shopping mall" experiment described by Loftus and Pickrell is particularly interesting because it demonstrates that entirely false autobiographical memories can be implanted with relative ease. Beyond its implications for legal testimony, this kind of research carries potential therapeutic value — helping people restore memories that have been blocked, or potentially helping individuals manage memories they find distressing.

Conclusion

The purpose of this paper is to better understand how memory works, in particular how the brain filters information into things that are retained and things that are not committed to memory. The research reviewed here — Schacter's taxonomy of memory sins, Loftus and Pickrell's false memory work, and Chan et al.'s findings on suggestibility — helps illuminate some of the core problems with memory and highlights the need to foster a deeper understanding of the processes that drive it. There are many productive lines of research to be pursued: how and why information is encoded, how memories are stored and maintained over time, how accuracy can be preserved, and how recall is shaped by subsequent experience. The more we understand about memory, the better equipped we will be to protect its integrity in the contexts where it matters most.

References

Chan, J., Thomas, A., & Bulevich, J. (2009). Recalling a witnessed event increases eyewitness suggestibility. Psychological Science.

Loftus, E., & Pickrell, J. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25(12), 720–725.

Schacter, D. (1999). The seven sins of memory. American Psychologist, 54(3), 182–203.