Reconstructive memory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:19, 20 June 2020

Revision as of 16:25, 29 June 2020

Line 7:

683–725. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press</ref>

In this manner, the various features of the experience must be joined together to form a coherent representation of the episode.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hemmer|first=Pernille|last2=Steyvers|first2=Mark|date=2009|title=A Bayesian Account of Reconstructive Memory|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01010.x|journal=Topics in Cognitive Science|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=189–202|doi=10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01010.x|issn=1756-8765}}</ref> If this binding process fails, it can result in [[Memory error|memory errors]]. The complexity required for reconstructing some episodes is quite demanding and can result in incorrect or incomplete recall.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Torres-Trejo|first=Frine|last2=Cansino|first2=Selene|date=2016-06-30|title=The Effects of the Amount of Information on Episodic Memory Binding|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5709/acp-0188-z|journal=Advances in Cognitive Psychology|volume=12|issue=2|pages=79–87|doi=10.5709/acp-0188-z|issn=1895-1171|doi-access=free}}</ref> This complexity leaves individuals susceptible to phenomena such as the [[misinformation effect]] across subsequent recollections.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kiat|first=John E.|last2=Belli|first2=Robert F.|date=2017-05-01|title=An exploratory high-density EEG investigation of the misinformation effect: Attentional and recollective differences between true and false perceptual memories|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074742717300606|journal=Neurobiology of Learning and Memory|language=en|volume=141|pages=199–208|doi=10.1016/j.nlm.2017.04.007|issn=1074-7427|pmid=28442391}}</ref> By employing reconstructive processes, individuals supplement other aspects of available personal knowledge and schema into the gaps found in episodic memory in order to provide a fuller and more coherent version, albeit one that is often distorted.

Many errors can occur when attempting to retrieve a specific episode. First, the retrieval cues used to initiate the search for a specific episode may be too similar to other experiential memories and the retrieval process may fail if the individual is unable to form a specific description of the unique characteristics of the given memory they would like to retrieve.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Burgess | first1 = PW | last2 = Shallice | first2 = T | year = 1996 | title = Confabulation and the control of recollection | url = | journal = Memory | volume = 4 | issue = | pages = 359–411 | doi = 10.1080/096582196388906 | pmid = 8817460 }}</ref> When there is little available distinctive information for a given episode there will be more overlap across multiple episodes, leading the individual to recall only the general similarities common to these memories. Ultimately proper recall for a desired target memory fails due to the interference of non-target memories that are activated because of their similarity.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hemmer|first=Pernille|last2=Steyvers|first2=Mark|date=2009|title=A Bayesian Account of Reconstructive Memory|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01010.x|journal=Topics in Cognitive Science|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=189–202|doi=10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01010.x|issn=1756-8765}}</ref>

Line 55:

However, in a study by Clifford and Scott (1978), participants were shown either a film of a violent crime or a film of a non-violent crime. The participants who viewed the stressful film had difficulty remembering details about the event compared to the participants that watched the non-violent film.<ref name="simplypsych" /> In a study by Brigham et al. (2010), subjects who experienced an electrical shock were less accurate in facial recognition tests, suggesting that some details were not well remembered under stressful situations.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brigham|first=John C.|last2=Maass|first2=Anne|last3=Martinez|first3=David|last4=Whittenberger|first4=Gary|date=1983-09-01|title=The Effect of Arousal on Facial Recognition|url=https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0403_6|journal=Basic and Applied Social Psychology|volume=4|issue=3|pages=279–293|doi=10.1207/s15324834basp0403_6|issn=0197-3533}}</ref> In fact, in the case of the phenomena known as [[weapon focus]], eyewitnesses to stressful crimes involving weapons may perform worse during suspect identification.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Fawcett|first=Jonathan M.|last2=Peace|first2=Kristine A.|last3=Greve|first3=Andrea|date=2016-09-01|title=Looking Down the Barrel of a Gun: What Do We Know About the Weapon Focus Effect?|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211368116300699|journal=Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition|language=en|volume=5|issue=3|pages=257–263|doi=10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.07.005|issn=2211-3681|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Further studies on flashbulb memories seem to indicate that witnesses may recall vivid sensory content unrelated to the actual event but which enhance its perceived vividness.<ref>{{Citation|last=Howes|first=Mary|title=Chapter 9 - Memory and Emotion|date=2014-01-01|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780124080874000098|work=Human Memory|pages=177–196|editor-last=Howes|editor-first=Mary|publisher=Academic Press|language=en|isbn=978-0-12-408087-4|access-date=2020-04-14|last2=O'Shea|first2=Geoffrey|editor2-last=O'Shea|editor2-first=Geoffrey|doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-408087-4.00009-8}}</ref> Due to this vividness, eyewitnesses may place higher confidence in their reconstructed memories.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Christianson|first=Sven-Åke|date=1992|title=Emotional stress and eyewitness memory: A critical review.|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.284|journal=Psychological Bulletin|volume=112|issue=2|pages=284–309|doi=10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.284|issn=1939-1455}}</ref>

====Application of schema====

Line 64:

====Leading questions====

Often during eyewitness testimonies the witness is interrogated about their particular view of an incident and often the interrogator will use [[leading question]]s to direct and control the type of response that is elicited by the witness.<ref>[{{cite journal | last1 = Loftus | first1 = E.F. | year = 1975 | title = Leading Questions and the Eyewitness Report | url = http://www.someya-net.com/01-Tsuyaku/Reading/Loftus75.pdf], Loftus,| E.F.format Leading= QuestionsPDF and| thejournal Eyewitness Report. (1975).= Cognitive Psychology, | volume = 7, 560-572.| issue = | pages = 560–572 }}</ref> This phenomenon occurs when the response a person gives can be persuaded by the way a question is worded. For example, a person could be posed a question in two different forms:

* "What was the approximate height of the robber?" which would lead the respondent to estimate the height according to their original perceptions. They could alternatively be asked:

* "How short was the robber?" which would persuade the respondent to recall that the robber was actually shorter than they had originally perceived.