SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
1
The Effects of Distinctive Processing and Sleep Deprivation on False Memory
Marissa Bell, Zac Shaiken, and Riah Sorn-ampai
Whitman College
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
2
Abstract
The present study explores the relationship between sleep deprivation and false
recognition. Sixty-three participants were administered the original Deese-Roediger McDermott
(DRM) procedure, or a modified DRM procedure in which each word was presented in a
distinctive font. Additionally, participants’ sleep data was collected using an actigraphy watch,
along with other sleep measures in order to determine their level of sleep deprivation. The
current study found that participants in the distinctive font condition falsely recognized
significantly fewer critical lures than participants in the normal font condition. While previous
research indicates that sleep deprivation correlates with higher rates of false recognition, the
current study found no significant differences in the rates of false recognition between sleep
deprived and non-sleep deprived individuals. These results suggest that distinctive processing
may be an effective psychological tool for augmenting memory. Additional research needs to be
done to further understand the relationship between sleep deprivation and false memory.
Keywords: sleep deprivation, false recognition, distinctive processing, memory, DRM
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
3
The Effects of Distinctive Processing and Sleep Deprivation on False Memory
Chronic sleep loss is a widespread problem in today’s society (Strine & Chapman, 2005).
According to the Center for Disease Control, more than one third of adults report that they
regularly receive inadequate sleep, which has psychological and physiological consequences
(Liu et al., 2016). For example, feelings of anger, sadness and anxiety have shown to be
associated with poor sleep quality (Thomsen, Mehlsen, Christensen & Zachariae, 2003).
Insufficient sleep has also been found to coexist with heart disease, kidney disease, high blood
pressure, and obesity (Prince & Abel, 2013). In addition to these negative effects of sleep
deprivation, a large body of literature has shown that a lack of sleep impairs cognitive functions.
More specifically, executive functions related to decision-making and attention is impaired with
sleep deprivation, promoting the creation of false memories (Killgore, 2010).
Before reporting on our experiment, we will first discuss how sleep and memory are
connected. This paper will then focus on how sleep is important for cognitive processes,
followed by an explanation on how a lack of sleep may result in inaccurate representations of
memory. Finally, we will discuss how distinctive processing may help in reducing false memory.
Role of Sleep in Memory
Psychologists have classified human memory into two distinct categories: procedural (or
implicit) and declarative (or explicit) memory. Declarative memory refers to memories of facts
and events that can be consciously recalled (Ullman, 2004). When people encode something
new, this novel information becomes meaningful, solidifying and sticking in our brains through a
process known as memory consolidation (McGaugh & Hertz, 1972). Memories can be
understood as webs of neural connections (Medina, 2009). During consolidation, more entry
points to these webs of connections are created, allowing for easier access to memories. These
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
4
webs of connections, made up of neural pathways, are also strengthened during sleep through a
process called myelination (McGaugh, 2000). During this process, an insulating sheath of myelin
is created around neuronal fibers, making activations of neural pathways easier and quicker
(Medina, 2009). In the past, researchers believed that memory consolidation took place with the
mere passage of time, however more recent findings suggest that the time spent in sleep also
plays a key role in preserving memory (McGaugh, 2000).
Some of the first evidence for sleep contributing to consolidation came from studies
reporting that sleep deprivation altered the consolidation of declarative memories. In a
pioneering study, participants were able to remember nonsense syllables and short stories much
better after intervals filled with sleep compared to intervals of wakefulness (Jenkins &
Dallenbach, 1924).
Gais and Born (2004) suggested that declarative memory benefits from sleep that is
dominated by periods of slow wave sleep (SWS). Retention of information in declarative
memory has been positively linked to sleep spindles, which occur during SWS. Sleep spindles
are thalamocortical bursts that occur roughly every three to ten seconds during non-REM sleep,
and last for around one to three seconds. Although the precise function of sleep spindles is
unknown, studies suggest that the function of sleep spindles is to preserve sleep by inhibiting
sensory input (Schabus et al., 2004; Yamadori, 1971). This suggestion is supported by Schabus
et al.’s study (2004) which involved giving participants a list of word pairs to memorize and
asking them to recall the pairs after sleep. Participants who had more sleep spindles tended to
recall the paired words better than participants who had fewer sleep spindles. Another study
examined the relationship between declarative memory and SWS by asking participants to watch
a movie and then answer some questions about the film the next morning. The researchers found
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
5
that sleep spindle density in SWS was strongly and positively correlated to declarative memory
recall (Cox, Hoffman & Talamini, 2012). In other words, participants who experienced dense
sleep spindles in SWS after watching the movie were more likely to retain information and
correctly answer questions about the film the following day compared to participants who did not
experience dense sleep spindles in SWS. These findings imply that a positive correlation exists
between sleep spindles and declarative memory consolidation. However, it remains unknown
whether sleep spindles are a result of thalamocortical encoding and consolidation, or if they are
the catalyst.
More specifically, verbal memory retention has been shown to be connected to sleep
spindle activity, whereas declarative memory for more complex materials seems to depend on
other sleep mechanisms (Clemens, Fabo, & Halasz, 2005). In one study, participants were asked
to study a number of faces with corresponding names. The next morning, they were asked to
recall this information by completing a facial recognition and name recall task. Name recall was
positively correlated with the number of sleep spindles during SWS, whereas facial recognition
was positively correlated to the duration of non-REM sleep (Clemens et al., 2005).
In summary, sleep is vital to the encoding and recall of memory. During sleep, memory
consolidation is enhanced through myelination of neural pathways. Additionally, the generation
of sleep spindles during SWS has been positively correlated to strengthening declarative
memory. Sleep deprivation, then, is thought to negatively affect or inhibit these processes,
potentially resulting in the creation of false memories.
Sleep Deprivation and the Physiology of Cognition
Lack of sleep interferes with the functioning of certain regions in the brain that underlie
cognition. Specifically, sleep deprivation affects parts of the brain responsible for storing
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
6
memories. Neuroimaging studies have found that activity within the prefrontal cortex declines
following sleep deprivation (Killgore, 2010). The prefrontal cortex supports memory
consolidation by storing memories that are encoded by the hippocampus during sleep (Euston,
Gruber, & McNaughton, 2012). These results affirm what is called the prefrontal vulnerability
hypothesis.
The prefrontal cortex, responsible for executive functioning, creativity and language, is
especially dependent on sleep (Muzur, Pace-Schott, & Hobson, 2002). The prefrontal
vulnerability hypothesis suggests that sleep deprivation significantly impairs cognitive
performance that depends on the prefrontal cortex (Horne, 1993). In order to perform optimally,
the frontal regions of the brain need time to rest during sleep (Muzur et al., 2002). Studies that
examine brain activity during sleep have found that the transition from a wakeful state into non-
REM sleep is characterized by frontal deactivation. With the deepening of non-REM sleep, the
deactivation of the prefrontal cortices deepens (Muzur et al., 2002). This finding suggests that
without sleep, the prefrontal cortex may become overworked, resulting in an impairment of the
cognitive capabilities supported by this region of the brain.
Sleep deprivation also affects the cognitive and physiological processes involved in
memory, such as decreasing working memory capacity (Frenda, Patihis, Loftus, Lewis, & Fenn,
2014). According to Bonnet and Arand (2003), sleep deprivation is associated with unique
patterns of cortisol and noradrenaline secretion. Secretion of both of these hormones is
dependent on rhythmic circadian cues. During sleep deprived or sleep fragmented states, the
secretion patterns of these hormones are disturbed.
Noradrenaline is particularly important to memory consolidation and retrieval processes
(Kim et al., 2015; Prokopová, 2010; Uematsu, Tan, & Johansen, 2015). Specifically,
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
7
noradrenaline modulates memories and is central in consolidating long-term memories (Gibbs,
Hutchinson, & Summers, 2010). Cortisol helps to encode memories and normal cortisol
secretions have been shown to assist in the encoding of memories (Ackermann, Hartmann,
Papassotiropoulos, de Quervain, & Rasch, 2013). However, elevated cortisol levels interfere with
memory retrieval mechanisms and result in decreased performance on memory tasks
(Ackermann et al., 2013).
Sleep Deprivation and False Memory
A false memory is a distortion of an existing memory, resulting in an erroneous or
confabulated memory representation (Kopelman, 1999). False memories can be measured or
revealed through recall and recognition. False recall is a type of memory distortion whereby an
individual freely recalls information, lacking any prompts or cues, that he or she believes has
been previously presented but was never actually present (Roediger & McDermott, 1995). False
recognition is a type of memory distortion where an individual is presented with a completely
novel stimulus (i.e. unstudied or unlearned) and incorrectly claims that he or she has seen or
encountered it before (Abe et al., 2013). There are two types of false recognition: unrelated and
related false recognition. For example, related false recognition occurs when an individual
falsely recognizes a stimulus that is semantically or visually similar, but not identical, to the
original stimuli. Unrelated false recognition refers to falsely recognizing completely novel
stimuli (Garoff-Eaton, Slotnick, & Schacter., 2006).
Sleep deprivation may also contribute to the creation of false memories by affecting the
ways in which memories are encoded. As described earlier, sleep loss impairs executive
functioning, working memory, problem solving, decision-making and attention, and has been
shown to negatively affect declarative learning and memory (Durmer & Dinges, 2005; Curcio,
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
8
Ferrara, & De Gennaro, 2006). Specifically, when individuals are sleep deprived they have
decreased attention, impaired working memory and weakened problem solving skills which may
lead difficulties in focusing and selectively processing information (Fougnie, 2008). Therefore,
sleep deprivation at encoding may result in the creation of inaccurate memories that do not
actually represent experienced events. In this way, false memories are created.
Sleep deprivation may promote the creation of false memories at a chemical level.
Learning information increases cAMP chemicals; these chemicals bind to proteins that are
responsible for converting easily altered memories into long-term memories (Prince & Abel,
2013). According to Prince and Abel (2013), there are critical periods of chemical uptake;
inhibiting cAMP uptake during these critical periods can impair memory consolidation. One of
these critical periods occurs during the first few hours of sleep. Thus, if sleep deprivation
overlaps with one of these critical periods, it may promote the creation of false memories by
impairing memory consolidation.
Psychologists have examined false memory in many ways, one of which is by using the
Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) procedure (Roediger & McDermott, 1995). The DRM
procedure creates false memories by presenting participants with a short list of words, all relating
to a specific theme, and participants are asked to remember as many words as possible. The
DRM procedure utilizes both unrelated and related false recognition. All words on the list are
semantically associated with a non-presented word, known as the “critical lure.” Semantically-
related items are intended to encourage participants to falsely recognize the critical lure, whereas
the unrelated distractor items are designed to elicit unrelated false recognition. Typically in both
recognition and recall tests, participants will claim to remember the critical lure just as much as
the words they were actually asked to study (Hunt, Smith, & Dunlap, 2011). When participants
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
9
are asked to recognize or recall words from the list, individuals who are sleep deprived often
falsely recall the critical lure (Roediger & McDermott, 1995)
The DRM procedure has been used to study the effects of sleep deprivation on false
recall. In one experiment, participants were divided into two groups and administered the DRM
procedure (Diekelmann, Landolt, Lahl, Born & Wagner, 2008). Participants first studied multiple
lists of semantically-related words. After the study phase, one group slept while the other group
remained awake all night. The following morning, both groups recalled words that they
remembered studying on the list. The group that was deprived of sleep had a higher rate of false
recall than the group that slept, suggesting that sleep deprivation at retrieval is associated with
more instances of false recall (Diekelmann et al., 2008).
Role of Distinctive Processing in False Memory
One mechanism that can assist in memory retrieval is distinctive processing at the time of
encoding. Distinctive processing is defined as the processing of differences within the context of
similarity (Hunt et al., 2011). Distinctive processing consists of two different components: item-
specific processing and relational processing. Relational processing can be understood as the
processing of similarities. Relational processing occurs when participants notice a semantic
relationship between words in DRM lists, because all words within the presented list are related
to the same theme. Relational processing leads to the encoding of semantically associated items
being grouped together in memory instead of as individual, distinct items. In contrast, item-
specific processing refers to processing distinctions between items grouped together in memory.
This form of processing involves focusing on differences between the studied words in the DRM
procedure that could allow the participant to better distinguish between studied words and non-
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
10
studied words. Together, relational processing and item-specific processing constitute distinctive
processing.
Arndt and Reder (2003) carried out a study examining the effects of distinctive
processing on memory using the DRM procedure. Each of the twelve semantically associated
words that participants were asked to study were presented in a separate, unique font.
Researchers believed that presenting each word in a unique font would increase distinctiveness
by enhancing the differences between each studied item, consequently decreasing the
participant’s level of false recognition by improving the ability to differentiate studied from
unstudied test items. The results confirmed that when words were presented in a unique font,
individuals were more likely to recognize presented words, and less likely to falsely recognize a
critical lure, compared to individuals who were asked to study words that appeared in the same
font.
Another study examined the effects of distinctive processing on false memory using the
DRM procedure (Hunt et al., 2011). Participants were randomly assigned to either an intentional
memory study task, or one of two orienting tasks: pleasantness rating or vowel counting. The
participants were then presented six lists of words from the DRM procedure. Participants in the
intentional memory group were instructed to pay attention to the presented words and try to
remember them. Individuals in the pleasantness rating group were asked to rate the pleasantness
of each word using a numerical scale. Those in the vowel counting group were asked to count the
number of vowels within each word. Orienting tasks encourage an association between a word
and a specific type of processing (such as a rank of pleasantness), which is thought to increase
distinctive processing by increasing the perceived differences between the words, and therefore
decrease false recognition. Participants who completed an orienting task for each word had less
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
11
false recognition of critical lures than individuals in the intentional memory group (Hunt et al.,
2011). Additionally, Hunt et al.’s (2011) study found that the orienting task condition also
increases hits of studied items; the pleasantness rating orienting task elicited higher rates of hits
than individuals in the intentional memory group. These results are consistent with Arndt and
Reder’s findings.
The results from both Arndt and Reder’s (2003) font study and Hunt et al.’s (2011)
orienting task study may be explained by the presence of distinctive processing. It is possible that
the manipulation of font and the presence of an orienting task in each respective study
encouraged participants’ item-specific processing and discouraged relational processing. The
idea that enhancing item specific processing reduces false memory is supported by a study
conducted by McCabe and colleagues (2004), who asked participants to study a word list using
an item-specific strategy to enhance the differences between words. Specifically, participants
were asked to think of the unique characteristics of each word—the characteristics that
differentiate the words from one another. Participants who used item-specific strategies
recognized significantly fewer critical lures than a control group who completed the DRM
procedure without using an item-specific strategy (McCabe, Presmanes, Robertson, & Smith,
2004). These results suggest that unique, item-specific details that are encoded with each word
can augment discrimination between studied items and critical lures.
The Present Study
The present study is concerned with examining the effect of sleep deprivation on
distinctive processing. As discussed earlier, sleep deprivation at retrieval increases potential for
false memory. However, as previously described, visual distinctive processing has been shown to
reduce false recognition. Therefore, we hypothesize that, (a) relative to a non-sleep deprived
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
12
group, a sleep deprived group will have higher rates of false recognition in a standard DRM
procedure that does not contain distinctive visual information, (b) a non-sleep deprived group
will have lower rates of false recognition in a modified DRM procedure compared to a non-sleep
deprived group that receives the standard DRM procedure, and that (c) a sleep deprived group
who receives the modified DRM procedure will receive similar scores to a non-sleep deprived
group that receives the standard DRM procedure.
Method
Participants
We recruited 67 participants from Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington.
Participants were recruited by word of mouth, email, and through introductory psychology
classes. After exclusionary screening, data from four participants were discarded due to either
missing information from their sleep log, or errors that occurred during the study and test
portions of the experiment. We used data from the remaining 63 participants. We asked
participants to report their age, preferred gender, ethnicity, how often they drink coffee, and
whether they had taken anything within the past three days that could interfere with sleep (either
by inducing or preventing it, including drinking to intoxication). Participants were between 18
and 24 years old. 48 females and 15 males participated in our study. Of these participants,
65.08% were Caucasian, 9.52% were Asian, 9.52% were Caucasian-Asian, 4.76% were
Hispanic, 1.59% were Caucasian-Hispanic, 1.59% were African American, and 7.94% chose not
to provide their race.
Materials and Measures
Original Deese-Roediger-McDermott Procedure Study List
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
13
The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) procedure is designed to measure false memory
of words from a word list. Each list in the DRM procedure contains fifteen words, all
semantically related to an unpresented word known as the critical lure. Examples of words
include snow, ice, and freeze, relating to the critical lure cold. We selected twelve DRM word
lists that were found to be the most effective in eliciting false recognition (Stadler, Roediger, &
McDermott, 1999). We divided our twelve word lists into two sets of six lists (see Appendix C).
Each participant was assigned to study one set of six lists; the remaining set of six lists were used
as unstudied words on the recognition test. The assignment of sets to study conditions was
counterbalanced across participants. Participants were shown the set of words all in the same
font, and were then given a recognition test in which they are asked to indicate which words they
remembered learning (Roediger & McDermott, 1995).
Modified Deese Roediger-McDermott Procedure Study List
The modified DRM procedure follows the original DRM procedure, except each item on
the word list will be presented in a unique font at study. During the recognition test, when
participants are asked to indicate whether they remember or do not remember the word being
presented, each item will appear as it did in the studied word list, in its unique font. The fonts
chosen for this experiment are unusual and unlikely to have been previously encountered. By
selecting unique fonts that do not resemble what one typically sees in everyday life, the items are
made more distinct (Arndt & Reder, 2003).
Recognition Test List
Two separate recognition tests were created for the original DRM study list and the
modified DRM study list, containing the words in distinctive fonts. The recognition test included
the first and seventh word from the six studied lists, the first and seventh word from the six
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
14
unstudied lists, and the critical lures from both the studied and unstudied lists. In total,
participants were shown 36 words rather than 192 words on the recognition test due to concerns
regarding the length of the experiment.
Epworth Sleepiness Scale
The Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) is a measure of daytime sleepiness (Appendix A).
The ESS is an 8-item self-response questionnaire. Each item asks participants to rate their
chances of falling asleep in different situations on a scale between 0 and 3, with 0 being would
never doze and 3 being high chance of dozing. Situations include sitting and talking to someone,
in a car while stopped for a few minutes in traffic, and watching television. The scores for each
response are added together to yield a final ESS score between 0, indicating no daytime
sleepiness, and 24, indicating a high level of daytime sleepiness (Johns, 1991). The internal
reliability of this test is high, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.88, as cited in Johns’ study (1992).
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) is a measure of sleep quality (Appendix B). It
is a 9-item self-response questionnaire that measures sleep quality during the past month.
Questions are divided into seven subscales, which are summed to yield a global PSQI score
between 0 and 21. A global score of 21 indicates the poorest quality sleep and 0 indicates the
best quality sleep. Responses to each item are made on a scale ranging from 0 and 3, where 0 is
not during the past month and 3 is three or more times a week. Items include during the past
month, how often have you taken medicine to help you sleep? and during the past month, how
often have you had trouble sleeping because you cannot get to sleep within 30 minutes? (Buysse,
Reynolds, Monk, Berman, & Kupfer, 1988). Internal reliability of the PSQI is high with a
Cronbach alpha of .80, as cited by Carpenter and Andrykowski (1998).
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
15
Actigraphy Watch
We used watches that collect actigraphy data to measure the amount of sleep per night
that each participant received over the duration of the study (Core C410 Activity and Sleep
watch; LifeTrak, Newark, CA). The watch uses accelerometers to measure movement which
ceases during sleep. A metastudy combining the results from 70 studies found consistently high
levels of agreement (over 80 percent) between sleep data collected through actigraphy watches
and sleep data formally collected using polysomnography in a monitored sleep lab, confirming
the validity of the watch (Morgenthaler et al., 2007).
Procedure
Data collection for each participant lasted four days, however the total time of active
participant engagement lasted approximately 45-60 minutes (Figure 1). On the first day of the
study, participants were asked to read an informed consent form and sign the document if they
chose to participate in the study. Next, they were given an actigraphy watch and a sleep log
(Figure 2). Participants were encouraged to wear the watch all day, but were told that it was only
necessary to wear the watch when they slept. Participants were asked to also manually record the
time that they woke up and went to bed in a sleep log for each day of the study, acting as
confirmation to the actigraphy watch sleep data. Participants were also asked to record the times
of any naps they took during the day, and number of cups of caffeine they consumed. On the
evening of day Day 3, participants met the experimenter in a Maxey Hall classroom and were
randomly assigned to study either the normal DRM, or a modified version of the DRM
procedure. Both DRM sets contained six word lists, each comprised of 15 semantically related
items, totaling 90 words. Each list was prefaced with text stating “list #1” or “list #2. ” A blank
screen appeared for three seconds at the start and the end of each word list. Items in each list
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
16
were shown on a computer screen for three seconds. A blank screen appeared for a half of a
second between each word. Participants were asked to say each word aloud, confirming that each
item was processed.
On the morning of Day 4, participants completed the recognition portion of the DRM
procedure. Words appeared on the screen until the participant indicated either remembering or
not remembering the word. This response triggered the appearance of the next word. Participants
pressed the slash (/) key, covered by a green sticker, to indicate they remembered studying the
word, or pressed the z key, covered by a red sticker, to indicate they did not remember studying
the word. For the modified DRM procedure, words were presented at test in the same font in
which they were studied. If the word was new, a new font was used. The data from these
questionnaires were used to further confirm a participant as either sleep deprived or non-sleep
deprived. Lastly, participants completed the completed the ESS questionnaire, the PSQI, and a
demographics questionnaire, and returned their actigraphy watches and sleep logs.
Results
Participants were categorized as either sleep deprived or non-sleep deprived using their
actigraphy watch data, and scores from the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Pittsburgh Sleep
Quality Index. Participants whose actigraphy data indicated that they had slept less than an
average of 8 hours per night met our first criteria of sleep deprivation. A second criterion we
used for categorizing participants was the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. According to the scoring
instructions of the ESS, participants who scored 10 or above were considerably sleepy.
According to the scoring instructions of the PSQI, participants who scored 5 or above were
considered to have poor sleep quality. To be placed in the sleep deprived category, the
participant’s data had to meet two out of three of these criteria. The memory tests measured how
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
17
many times a participant falsely recalled critical lures related to the studied words, falsely
recalled unstudied words and critical lures, and correctly identified studied words.
First, we considered whether sleep was different among the groups. An independent-
samples t-test was conducted to compare average hours of sleep in sleep deprived (N=27) and
non-sleep deprived (N=38) conditions. There was a significant difference between the average
hours of sleep in sleep deprived (M = 7.40, SD = 1.03) and non-sleep deprived (M = 8.24, SD =
0.55) participants, t(63) = 4.30, p = .01. A second independent-samples t-test was conducted to
compare ESS scores in sleep deprived and non-sleep deprived conditions. There was a
significant difference between ESS scores in sleep deprived (M = 8.85, SD = 3.30) and non-sleep
deprived (M = 5.62, SD = 2.28) groups, t(63) = 4.64, p = .01. An independent-samples t-test was
also conducted to compare PSQI scores in sleep deprived and non-sleep deprived conditions.
There was a significant difference between PSQI scores in sleep deprived (M = 6.00, SD = 1.51)
and non-sleep deprived (M = 4.00, SD = 1.70) groups, t(63) = 4.90, p = .01.
Data from this study were analyzed using 2 (font) x 2 (sleep condition) ANOVAs. We
analyzed false alarms first because false recognition of critical lures differed significantly
between distinctive font (M = 0.62, SD = 0.30) and normal font (M = 0.80, SD = 0.28) groups, as
indicated by a main effect of font, F(1, 61) = 5.95, MSE = 0.09, p = .02, =.09. These
findings replicate those found by Arndt and Reder (2003). However, false recognition of critical
lures did not differ significantly between sleep deprived (M = 0.71, SD = 0.35) and non-sleep
deprived (M = 0.71, SD = 0.27) groups, F(1, 61) = 0.01, MSE = 0.09, p = .93, = .01. There
was also no significant interaction between sleep category and font condition, F(1, 61) = 0.93,
MSE = 0.09, p = .34, = .02.
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
18
To determine whether this reduction of false recognition extended to other word types,
we analyzed false alarms of non-studied words that were not critical lures and found that they did
not differ significantly between distinctive font (M = .16, SD = 0.13) and normal font (M = 0.21,
SD = 0.15) conditions, F(1, 61) = 2.14, MSE = 0.02, p = .15, = .03. False alarms of non-
studied words also did not differ significantly between sleep deprived (M = 0.18, SD = 0.15) and
non-sleep deprived (M = 0.19, SD = 0.14) groups, F(1, 61) = 0.08, MSE = 0.02, p = .78, =
.01. There was no significant interaction between sleep category and font condition, F(1, 61) =
0.30, MSE = 0.02, p = .58, = .01.
Turning to hits, hits for the first word studied within each list did not differ significantly
between distinctive font (M = 0.87, SD = 0.14) and normal font (M = 0.88, SD = 0.17) groups,
F(1, 61) = 0.03, MSE = 0.03, p = .86, = .01. Hits for first words also did not differ
significantly between sleep deprived (M = 0.88, SD = 0.20) and non-sleep deprived (M = 0.87,
SD = 0.12) groups, F(1, 61) = 0.01, MSE = 0.03, p = .96, = .01. There was also no significant
interaction between sleep category and font condition, F(1, 61) = 0.25, MSE = 0.03, p = .62, =
.01.
Similarly, hits for the seventh word studied within each list did not differ significantly
between font (M = 0.79, SD = 0.24) and normal font (M = 0.74, SD = 0.19) conditions, F(1, 61)
= 0.71, MSE = 0.05, p = .40, = .01. Hits for seventh studied words also did not differ
significantly between sleep deprived (M = 0.77, SD = 0.22) and non-sleep deprived (M = 0.76,
SD = 0.21) groups, F(1, 61) = 0.02, MSE = 0.05, p = .88, = .01. Finally, there was no
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
19
significant interaction between sleep category and font condition, F(1, 61) = 0.20, MSE = 0.05, p
= .66, = .01.
Discussion
In conducting this study, we hoped to examine the interaction between sleep deprivation,
distinctive processing and false memory. We examined these three factors by monitoring
participants’ total hours of sleep, sleep quality, sleepiness levels, and administering the DRM
procedure in which participants were asked to study lists of words and then complete a
recognition test. We hypothesized that sleep deprivation would increase false recognition, and
that distinctive processing would decrease false recognition. In addition, we hypothesized that
the increase in false memory attributed to sleep deprivation would be attenuated by distinctive
processing. Our results partially confirm our hypotheses. Distinctive fonts significantly reduced
false recognition. Individuals who were shown words in distinctive fonts were less likely to
falsely recognize the semantically associated critical lure. This finding suggests that distinctive
processing is effective in reducing false recognition. Sleep had no significant effect on false
recognition. Sleep deprived and non-sleep deprived participants did not differ significantly in
correctly rejecting the critical lure.
Although much research indicates that sleep deprivation promotes false memories, some
studies have also found that sleep may enhance false memories (Diekelmann et al., 2008);
Diekelmann et al., 2009). When we sleep, memories are consolidated and organized. During
consolidation, these memories can be qualitatively changed, resulting in false memory (Payne et
al., 2009). In a study performed by Diekelmann, Born, and Wagner (2009), participants were
presented with a list of words to study. After studying the list, they either slept (non-sleep
deprived), stayed awake during the night (sleep deprived), or were awake during the day
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
20
(daytime wakefulness). Both the non-sleep deprived and the sleep deprived group falsely
recalled significantly more critical lures than the daytime wakefulness group. In addition,
participants who were non-sleep deprived recalled more critical lures than both of the sleep
deprived and daytime wakefulness groups.
These findings suggest that memories also become distorted during the memory
consolidation process that occurs during sleep, thereby promoting the creation of false memories.
These seemingly contradictory findings might also be explained through procedural differences.
In the study explained above, Diekelmann et al. (2009) examined false memory through recall
rather than recognition. In addition, sleep was manipulated after learning the lists. In our study,
participants were given a recognition test, rather than a recall test where one must freely recall a
word without any prompting. In order to classify participants as either sleep deprived or non-
sleep deprived, we examined individuals’ average sleep data from three days before the encoding
test up until the morning of the recognition test. In contrast, the Diekelmann study considered
sleep only during the night after encoding and before the recall test. These differences in
procedure may explain why our results differ. Timing of sleep deprivation could affect false
memory. An individual who is sleep deprived during both encoding and retrieval may be
affected differently compared to someone who only experiences sleep deprivation during the
retrieval stage. The amount of sleep deprivation that an person experiences could also affect false
memory.
Limitations
There were several limitations to our study. Individual differences in the amount of sleep
that a person needs per night makes sleep deprivation difficult to quantify (Mercer, Merrit, &
Cowell, 1998). Some participants may have felt well rested after sleeping for six hours, whereas
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
21
others may have required nine hours of sleep in order to feel well rested. Additional research is
needed to better quantify sleep deprivation (Van Dongen, Vitellaro, & Dinges, 2005). We
attempted to account for this difficulty by using a sleepiness scale and sleep quality index in
addition to actigraphy data. Future research could improve upon this by replacing actigraphy data
with EEG data and controlling for caffeine intake.
Initially, we intended to exclude participants depending on their levels of caffeine intake.
However, we ultimately decided that excluding their data would significantly reduce our sample
size, thereby reducing the statistical power of our analyses. As a result, overlooking that
information could have led us to wrongly categorize a participant as sleep deprived or non-sleep
deprived.
Samples selected on college campuses are generally not representative of the larger
population, as students generally differ in age, socioeconomic status, education, and ethnicity
(Okazaki & Sue, 1995). All of the data from our research was collected from a majority of
Caucasian students attending an expensive liberal arts college in the Pacific Northwest. As a
result, our data does not truly reflect the general population. With our narrow, skewed sample
size it is difficult to determine the external validity of our results.
Strengths
Our results indicate that distinctive processing plays a significant role in reducing false
memory. Individuals who received semantically similar word lists in which the words were
presented in a unique font were more likely to correctly reject the critical lure. Participants who
were presented with words in normal fonts were more likely to falsely identify the critical lure as
a previously studied word. Our results replicate research conducted by Arndt and Reder (2003),
which indicate that distinctive fonts reduce false recognition.
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
22
Even though we were unable to implement a more rigorous sleep study and measure
participants’ sleep activity more precisely through an electroencephalogram, we included ample
sleep measures. In addition to collecting a total number of hours slept through an actigraphy
watch, we also administered one scale measuring participants’ level of sleepiness and another
examining their sleep quality. Together, these three measures examined sleep deprivation in a
holistic, comprehensive way.
Despite the time commitment and length of our study, we were able to recruit a fairly
large number of students to participate. Our study required a large number of participants in
order to have relatively equal numbers of participants in each condition. As we were able to
recruit 63 participants, a sufficient number of individuals fell into the sleep deprived and non-
sleep deprived, and font and distinctive font groups, allowing us to adequately analyze our data.
Future Research
Our study supported previous findings suggesting that presenting DRM words in
distinctive fonts elicits lower rates of false recognition than words presented in similar fonts
(Arndt & Reder, 2003). Future research could examine the effect of distinctive processing on an
auditory version of the DRM procedure. Instead of having each word presented in the same
voice, each word could be presented in a unique voice to assess whether an auditory version of
distinctive processing would be effective in reducing false recognition in auditory memories.
Additionally, our study examined the role of distinctive processing in enhancing
declarative memory. Future research on false memory could shift the focus towards examining
whether distinctive processing can impact implicit memory as well. Potential experiments could
examine whether presenting unique stimuli during a procedural learning task had an impact on
later performance. For example, participants could be asked to perform a series of movements
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
23
(run, jump, walk, etc.). Half of the participants would only be asked to perform the series of
movements, while the other half would be told the series of movements and exposed to a unique
sound for each movement. Analyses could compare the number of errors at testing between the
two groups, and the time it takes each group to complete the series of movements.
Our study concluded that sleep played no significant role in false recognition. Although
our literature review mainly focused on research supporting the claim that sleep deprivation
increases an individual’s susceptibility to false memory, other research has led to different
conclusions. Future research could attempt to further elucidate why some studies indicate that
sleep promotes the creation of false memories, while other studies suggest that sleep deprivation
promotes the creation of false memories.
References
Abe, N., Fujii, T., Suzuki, M., Ueno, A., Shigemune, Y., Mugikura, S., & Mori, E.
(2013). Encoding- and retrieval-related brain activity underlying false
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
24
recognition. Neuroscience Research, 76, 240-250.
Ackermann, S., Hartmann, F., Papassotiropoulos, A., de Quervain, D., & Rasch, B.
(2013). Associations between basal cortisol levels and memory retrieval in
healthy young individuals. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11, 1896-1907.
Arndt, J., & Reder, L. (2003). The effect of distinctive visual formation on false
recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 1-15.
Bonnet, M., & Arand, D. (2003). Clinical effects of sleep fragmentation versus sleep
deprivation. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 7, 297-310.
Buysse, D., Reynolds III, C., Monk, T., Berman, S., & Kupfer, D. (1988). The Pittsburgh
sleep quality index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry
Research, 28, 193-213.
Carpenter, J. S. & Andrykowski, M. A. (1998). Psychometric evaluation of the pittsburgh sleep
quality index. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 45:1, 5-13.
Clemens, Z., Fabo, D., & Halasz, P. (2005). Overnight verbal memory retention
correlates with the number of sleep spindles. Neuroscience, 132, 529-535.
Cox, R., Hofman, W. F., & Talamini, L. M. (2012). Involvement of spindles in memory
consolidation is slow wave sleep-specific. Learning and Memory, 19. 264-267.
Curcio, G., Ferrara, M., & De Gennaro, L. (2006). Sleep loss, learning capacity, and
academic performance. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 10, 323-337.
Diekelmann, S., Born, J., & Wagner, U. (2009). Sleep enhances false memories depending
on general memory performance. Behavioural Brain Research, 208, 245-249.
Diekelmann, S., Landolt, H-P., Lahl, O., Born, J., & Wagner, U. (2008). Sleep loss
produces false memories. Plos One, 3, 1-9.
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
25
Durmer, J., & Dinges, D. (2005). Neurocognitive consequences of sleep. Seminars in
Neurology, 25(1), 117-129.
Euston, D. R., Gruber, A. J., & McNaughton, B. L. (2012). The role of medial prefrontal
cortex in memory and decision making. Neuron, 76, 1057-1070.
Frenda, S. J., Patihis, L., Loftus, E. F., Lewis, H. C., & Fenn, K. M. (2014). Sleep
deprivation and false memories. Psychological Science, 25(9), 1674-1681.
Fougnie, D. (2008). The relationship between attention and working memory. In N.
Johansen (Ed.). New research on short-term memory (pp. 1-45). Nova Science
Publishes, Inc.
Gais, S., & Born, J. (2004). Declarative memory consolidation: Mechanisms acting
during human sleep. Learning and Memory, 11(6), 679-685.
Garoff-Eaton, R., Slotnick, S., & Schacter, D. (2006). Not all false memories are created
equal: The neural basis of false recognition. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 1645-1652.
Gibbs, M. E., Hutchinson, D. S., & Summers, R. J. (2010). Noradrenaline release in the
locus coeruleus modulates memory formation and consolidation: Roles for α- and
β-adrenergic receptors. Neuroscience, 170, 1209-1222.
Horne, J. A. (1993). Human sleep, sleep loss and behavior: Implications for the prefrontal
cortex and psychiatric disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 413-419.
Hunt, R., Smith, R., & Dunlap, K. (2011). How does distinctive processing reduce false
recall? Journal of Memory and Language, 65(4), 378-389.
Jenkins, J. G., & Dallenbach, K. M. (1924). Obliviscence during sleep and waking.
American Journal of Psychology, 35(4), 605-612.
Johns, M. (1991). A new method for measuring daytime sleepiness: The Epworth
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
26
Sleepiness Scale. Sleep, 14, 540-545.
Johns, M. (1992). Reliability and factor analysis of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. Sleep,
15:4, 376-381.
Kim, Y., Elemenhorst, D., Weisshaupt, A., Wedekind, F., Kroll, T., McCarley, R.,
Strecker, R., & Bauer, A. (2015). Chronic sleep restriction includes long-lasting
changes in adenosine and noradrenaline receptor density in the rat brain. Journal
of Sleep Research, 4, 549-558.
Killgore, W. D. (2010). Effects of sleep deprivation on cognition. Progress in Brain
Research, 185, 105-129.
Kopelman, M. D. (1999). Varieties of false memory. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 16,
197-214.
Liu, Y., Wheaton, A. G., Chapman, D. P., Cunningham, T. J., Lu, H., Croft, J. B. (2016).
Prevalence of healthy sleep duration among adults. Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report, 65:6, 137-141.
McCabe, D., Presmanes, A., Robertson, C., & Smith, A. (2004). Item-specific processing
reduces false memories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1074-1079.
McGaugh, J. L. (2000). Memory- A century of consolidation. Science, 287, 248-
251.
McGaugh, J. L., & Hertz, M. J. (1972). Memory consolidation. San Francisco: Albion.
Medina, J. (2009). Brain rules: 12 principles for surviving and thriving at work, home
and school. Seattle, WA: Pear Press.
Mercer, P., Merritt, S., & Cowell, J. (1998). Differences in reported sleep need among
adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 23, 259-263.
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
27
Morgenthaler, T., Alessi, C., Friedman, L., Owens, J., Kapur, V., Boehlecke, B., &
Swick, T. (2007). Practice parameters for the use of actigraphy in the assessment
of sleep and sleep disorders: An update for 2007. Sleep, 30, 519-529.
Muzur, A., Pace-Schott, E. F., & Hobson, J. A. (2002). The prefrontal cortex in sleep.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 475-481.
Okazaki, S. & Sue, Stanley. (1995). Methodological issues in assessment research with
ethnic minorities. Psychological Assessment, 7:3, 367-375.
Payne, J., Schacter, D., Propper, R., Huang, L., Wamsley, E., Tucker, M., Walker, M., &
Stickgold, R. (2009). The role of sleep in false memory formation. Neurobiology
of Learning and Memory, 92, 327-334.
Prokopová, I. (2010). [Noradrenaline and behavior]. Cesk Fysiol, 59, 51-58.
Prince, T., & Abel, T. (2013). The impact of sleep loss on hippocampal function.
Learning and Memory, 20, 558-569.
Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering
words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803–814.
Schabus, M., Gruber, G., Parapatics, S., Sauter, C., Klösch, G., Anderer, P., &Zeithofer,
J. (2004). Sleep spindles and their significance for declarative memory consolidation.
Sleep, 27, 1479-1485.
Stadler, M., Roediger, H., & McDermott, K. (1999). Norms for word lists that create
false memories. Memory and Cognition, 27(3), 494-500.
Strine, T. W., & Chapman, D. P. (2005). Associations of frequent sleep insufficiency
with health-related quality of life and health behaviors. Sleep Medicine, 6, 23-27.
SLEEP, FALSE MEMORY, AND DISTINCTIVE PROCESSING
28
Thomsen, D. K., Mehlsen, M. Y., Christensen, S., & Zachariae, R. (2003). Rumination:
Relationship with negative mood and sleep quality. Personality and Individual
Differences, 34, 1293-1301.
Uematsu, A., Tan, B., & Johansen, J. (2015). Projection specificity in heterogeneous
locus coeruleus cell populations: Implications for learning and memory. Cold
Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 22, 444-451.
Ullman, M. (2004). Contribution of memory circuits to language: The
declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231-270.
Van Dongen, H., Vitellaro, K., & Dinges, D. (2005). Individual differences in adult
human sleep and wakefulness: Leitmotif for a research agenda. Sleep, 28,
479-496.
Yamadori, A. (1971). Role of the spindles in the onset of sleep. Kobe Journal of Medical
Sciences, 17, 97-111.