Thanks for the

Memories!

By:  Lyndsay  Smokovitz  

Introduction

Who?  

•  Elizabeth  Lo:us    • Cogni>ve  Psychologist  

Hypothesis?    

• A  ques>on  that  contains  a  false  presupposi>on  allows  the  brain  to  incorporate  new,  false  informa>on  into  the  memory    

•  The  memory  is  not  recalled,  but  reconstructed  

What  next?  

•  Four  experiments  were  conducted    •  Each  experiment  tested  memory  with  a  false  presupposi>on    

pre·sup·po·si·tion Something that is implied and must be true for statement to make sense

hLp://mercercogni>vepsychology.pbworks.com/f/1290909633/memory.jpg  

hLp://mercercogni>vepsychology.pbworks.com/f/1290909633/memory.jpg  

Experiment I •  150 participants were shown a

traffic accident video clip involving a car that ran a stop sign

•  Participants then answered 10 questions

•  đ of the group (Group A) received the question:

“How fast was car A going when it turned right?”

•  Other đ (Group B) received:

“How fast was car going when it ran stop sign?”

•  Both groups were then asked if they saw a stop sign

Participants who claimed to have seen a stop sign

53% 0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Group  A  

Group  B  

35%

Objective: Alter memory using a false presupposition

Experiment II •  40 participants viewed clip of class being disrupted by 8 antiwar

demonstrators

•  Were then given 20 questions (all but 1 question was identical):

•  đ of participants (Group C) were asked:

“Was the leader of the 4 demonstrators male?”

•  Other đ (Group D) were asked:

“Was the leader of the 12 demonstrators male?”  

•  After 1 week, participants returned to answer:

“How many demonstrators did you see in the classroom?”

0   2   4   6   8   10  

Group  C  

Group  D  

6.4

8.85

Objective: Alter memory using presupposition and delayed memory test

Experiment III •  150 university students watched a video involving a white sports car accident

•  After video, participants answered 10 questions:

•  đ of participants (Group E) were asked:

“How fast was the white car going when it passed the barn on the country road?”

•  Other đ (Group F) were asked:

“How fast was the white car going on the country road?”

Objective: Altered memory to include objects that never existed in original event

0.00%   5.00%   10.00%   15.00%   20.00%  

Group  E  

Group  F  

17.3%

2.7%

Participants that claimed to have seen a barn

•  Participants returned to answer 10 new questions

Experiment IV Objective: Demonstrated how memory would adjust to the mention of an object that never existed in the original event

•  150 participants viewed a film involving a collision between a car and a man pushing a baby carriage

•  Answered questionnaire containing 40 filler questions and these 5 key questions:

•  Group G answered direct questions:

“Did you see a barn in the film?”

•  Group H answered questions containing false presuppositions:

“Did you see a station wagon parked in the front of the barn?”

•  Group I is the control group and only answered the 40 filler questions

0%  

5%  

10%  

15%  

20%  

25%  

30%  

Group  G  

Group  H  

Group  I  

The above percentages were the amount who saw the objects that were never part of the original event.

29.2%

15.6%

8.4%

Data Concluded/Results:

Experiment I •  A larger amount of Group B

claimed to have seen a stop sign

•  Stop sign is the presupposition

Experiment II •  On average, the groups claimed to

have seen a number near the presupposed number

•  Questions contained an implied number of antiwar demonstrators

Experiment III •  The barn is implied to exist in the

question •  There was a 14.6% difference

between the two groups •  Group that received the question with

a false presupposition had a greater amount of participants claim to see the barn

Experiment IV •  The data from the direct question

group shows that just the mention of an object will alter memory

•  Greatest amount of participants to see nonexistent object

•  False presupposition group was second to experience the impact

•  Implication alters memory

Data  shows  that  the  par>cipants’  memory  was  altered  to  fit  what  the  presupposi>on  implied.    

Real World Application

•  It is important to question the reliability of memory as a resource

•  Inaccuracy of an eyewitness’ memory in a court case

•  Memory is taken through a process from time of event to trial

•  Police interviews, “dinner-table stories”, revisiting memory after event, and retelling event at trial

•  Each time a memory is recalled, the neural pathways are altered

•  According to National Geographic, in 2014 4.1% of individual’s on trial were falsely convicted

Personal Application •  Have you ever reminisced in your favorite memory with your

best friend?

•  Two different perspectives are brought to light, but neither are right

•  Both memories have been reconstructed overtime

•  When trying to resolve a two-sided conflict

•  Remember human error in recalling memory

Works Cited Hock, R. R. (2013). Forty Studies that Changed Psychology: Explorations into the History of Psychological

Research. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Ciccarelli, S., White, J. N., (2013). Psychology. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. All images are personal property except for the following: Edgar, J. (Photographer). (2011). Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://edgarjaquez.deviantart.com Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://www.rosiesandz.com Childhood Memories [Photograph]. (2010). Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://scribbles1337.deviantart.com Pham, H. X. (Photographer). (2013). Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://www.slate.com/articles Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://mercercognitivepsychology.pbworks.com Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://www.viralnovelty.net Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://picturequotes.info/images/dory-fish-meme Retrieved April 20, 2015, from: http://thumbs.dreamstime.com

Thank you!