Memory Sins in Applied Settings: What kind of Progress? PSYC 1000 Spring, 2024 presented by carelle mulopo Part 1 - The 7 Sins of Memory: 2 Decades of Progress In his earlier works and research from over 20 years ago, (Schacter, 1999, 2001), proposed that all the different ways our memory can fail or make errors can be categorized into 7 main types or "sins". He split these 7 sins into two broad groups/categories: Sins of Omission: Sins of Commission: Transience Misattribution Absentmindedness Suggestibility Blocking Bias Persistence Part 1 - The 7 Sins of Memory: 2 Decades of Progress Sins of Omission: Transience - Over time, our recollections of past experiences and facts tend to weaken or vanish altogether. Our memories are not permanent; they are fleeting. Absentmindedness - If we are not fully focused or engaged when new information is presented, we may fail to properly process and integrate it into our memory in the first place, resulting in gaps or lapses Blocking - Even when details are securely stored away in our memory, we sometimes struggle to recall them when needed. The information is retained somewhere in our brains, but not immediately accessible when we try to remember. Sins of Commission: Misattribution - We accurately recall a piece of information, but mistakenly attribute it to the wrong context of when, where or from whom we obtained it. The memory itself is right, but the source linkage is off. Suggestibility - After an initial experience, our memories can be subtly shaped, influenced, distorted or altered by information or suggestions we receive after the original event. Bias - Our personal perspectives, personal preferences, and natural tendencies can make our memories less reliable. What we think and how we feel influences how we recall things. Our memories don’t always accurately reflect what really occurred. Persistence - Certain memories, whether factually incorrect or psychologically unpleasant, stubbornly return and push themselves on conscious thought despite our will, sometimes in the form of traumatic memories. Part 1 - The 7 Sins of Memory: The implications of human memory Researchers have gained valuable insights into how memory sins like transience, absentmindedness, misattribution and suggestibility can impact things like eyewitness testimony and legal outcomes. However, more work is still needed to translate these results into practical answers. In education, the sins of suggestibility and persistence pose challenges, but educators are learning more about techniques to improve retention and correct misunderstandings. Technology also offers potential tools to support learning. Clinically characterizing how memory sins arise and are maintained can help patients and practitioners address conditions like PTSD. But individual differences would still complicate the process of applying these findings. Privacy and security are ongoing issues as technological advances interact with memory sins like absentmindedness. Balancing convenience and protection remains difficult. Overall, while progress has been made in applying memory research, fully understanding how complicated human memory works and consistently fixing its weaknesses pose an enormous challenge. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : T-A-B The 3 sins of omission describe different kinds of forgetting: Transience (information becomes harder to remember overtime), Absentmindedness (breakdown at the interface of attention and memory that results in being distracted and not properly remembering things), And blocking (the information is temporarily unavailable in your memory). Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : TRANSIENCE Transience could be considered the "original sin" of memory, as it was a key focus in the pioneering work of Ebbinghaus back in the late 1800s. Ebbinghaus famously depicted the "forgetting curve" - how our memories naturally fade and disappear over time. Trying to understand the nature of this forgetting process has been a longstanding area of research in both psychology and neuroscience. Researchers have continued studying the factors that can increase or decrease this transient nature of our memories. Over the past 2 decades, there has been a lot of progress in applied research looking at the specific conditions where transience (or memory fading) is more or less likely to occur. This includes examining how different technologies and devices we use today can impact our ability to retain information over time. So, in essence, transience - the natural fading of memories - was one of the earliest and most fundamental memory "sins" identified. And in the last 20 years, there have been advancements in understanding the factors that influence this transient nature of human memory, especially as it relates to real-world applications and technologies. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : ANTITRANSIENCE One of the most fascinating memory-related discoveries in the past 20 years involves a rare group of people known as individuals with "highly superior autobiographical memory" (or HSAM for short). These HSAM individuals have an extraordinary ability to recall details about their own personal experiences and everyday life, even after long periods of time, that normally would be forgotten by most people. According to standard memory tests performed by researchers LePort et al. (2016) in a lab setting - At short-term intervals (1 week), HSAM individuals perform similarly to ordinary people in recalling personal experiences. But at much longer intervals (1 month, 1 year, even 10 years), HSAM individuals remembered significantly more details about their autobiographical memories compared to controls. This suggests HSAM is not about initially encoding more information. Rather, it's characterized by an "antitransience" effect - a reduced tendency for personal memories to fade or become forgotten over extended periods. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : ANTITRANSIENCE 2 People with highly superior autobiographical memory (HSAM) scored higher on measures of obsessive-compulsive behaviors, including ruminating. This obsessive tendency in HSAM was linked to their heightened ability to recall specific details about their personal experiences across longer periods of time (1 month). Researchers argued that the remarkable memory in HSAM could originate from a "obsessive" practice of repeatedly rehearsing and recalling autobiographical experiences. i.e. The reason HSAM individuals have such good long-term memory for personal experiences is that they tend to constantly go over and recall their memories, almost obsessively. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HYPERTRANSIENCE The findings about HSAM individuals' good long-term memory and the benefits of repeatedly practicing recall are the opposite of what happens in a condition called accelerated long-term forgetting (ALF). ALF is seen mostly in people with epilepsy. These patients can remember things just fine over short time periods of 30-60 minutes. But then they start forgetting that information much faster than normal over longer delays of days or weeks. So while HSAM people and retrieval practice show a slowdown in forgetting over time ("antitransience"), ALF patients exhibit a speeding up of forgetting over time ("hypertransience"). This rapid forgetting in ALF can cause real problems in everyday life. For example, epileptic children with ALF have more trouble remembering important life events, and this is linked to increased behavioral, social, and mood issues. ALF may also be an early sign of future cognitive decline in elderly populations. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : Impact of Technology: Evidence From GPS In recent years, there has been growing concern about how the use of technology, like smartphones, the internet, and GPS, may be negatively impacting our memory. One area of focus has been the potential impact of GPS technology. Some news reports have even used the phrase "digital amnesia" to describe how people who use a lot of GPS technology might have trouble remembering new information over time. This mostly relates to the "sin" of transience - - where memories tend to fade over time. The idea is that relying on technology like GPS could be making it harder for people to form strong, long-lasting memories. However, the "sin" of absentmindedness is also relevant here. When we're distracted by technology, and our phones, it can make it harder for us to pay attention and properly remember new information in the first place. So, both the forgetting of memories over time, and the trouble forming strong memories to begin with, are ways that heavy technology use might be negatively impacting our memory and cognitive abilities. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : Impact of Technology: Evidence From GPS 2 Previous research has looked at how using GPS impacts memory in a specific, task-focused way. For example, people may have trouble remembering details of a route they navigated using GPS. This is called a "task-specific effect.“ However, there is a broader concern that using a lot of technology, like GPS, could lead to a more general "digital amnesia." This suggests technology use may have a wider impact on memory, beyond just the specific task. There are two main possibilities for this broader effect: "Domain-specific effect" - Extensive GPS use could negatively impact a person's overall spatial memory, even when they aren't using GPS. "Domain-general effect" - Relying on GPS could hurt both spatial memory and other types of memory, like nonspatial memory. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : ABSENTMINDEDNESS Absentminded memory mistakes occur because we aren't paying close enough attention to something when we’re trying to remember or recall it. Researchers have found that absentminded memory mistakes are linked to the issue of mind wandering - when your thoughts drift away from the task at hand. This area of research started gaining momentum in the early 2000s, after an influential review was published. At first, the research wasn't focused on how mind wandering affects memory. But soon, studies started examining how mind wandering impacts memory and learning, especially in educational settings. The memory failures associated with mind wandering can be seen as absentminded errors. This is because the forgetting is thought to happen when you don't pay close enough attention to the material you're trying to remember, when you're encoding it. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : ABSENTMINDEDNESS Studies have found a clear link between mind wandering and poorer memory/learning performance in educational settings. When students' minds wander during lectures, whether in-person or video-recorded, they tend to retain less of the lecture content. The more their minds wander, the worse their retention. This negative relationship between mind wandering and memory has been documented across multiple studies, including ones looking at individual lectures as well as entire college courses. Interestingly, intentional mind wandering (deliberately thinking about unrelated things) seems to have an even stronger detrimental effect on quiz/test performance compared to unintentional mind wandering. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : ABSENTMINDEDNESS Since studies have shown the negative effects of mind wandering on learning and memory during lectures, researchers have looked at ways to reduce mind wandering and improve attention. Some experiments have found that giving students periodic quizzes or tests during a lecture can help. This "interpolated testing" seems to decrease mind wandering and boost students' memory of the lecture content, compared to just re-studying the material. However, not all studies have found this benefit. One recent study didn't see a significant improvement in memory from the interpolated testing, though it did still reduce mind wandering to some degree. One potential explanation is that note-taking may play an important role. The studies that found a benefit of interpolated testing also saw increases in note-taking by the students. So the act of note-taking during the lecture may be part of why the testing helps. More research is still needed to fully understand how interpolated testing and note-taking interact to influence attention and learning during lectures. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MEDIA MULTITASKING Researchers have found that students' attention can be impacted not just by their minds wandering during lectures, but also by media multitasking. Media multitasking means using smartphones, laptops, or other screens to do unrelated activities during the lecture. Studies have shown that media multitasking is quite common among students in classroom settings. And researchers have started examining the effects of this media multitasking on students' engagement with the lecture material. In one study, researchers would occasionally check in with students during a lecture and ask if they were media multitasking at that moment. The students said they were media multitasking about a third of the time. The researchers also found that when students were media multitasking, it was negatively correlated with their memory and understanding of the lecture content. So just like mind wandering, media multitasking during lectures seems to impair students' ability to learn and retain the material being taught. This is an important area of ongoing research. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MEDIA MULTITASKING 2 In another study that looked at an entire semester, the researchers asked students about both media multitasking and mind wandering during lectures. They found that media multitasking was actually more harmful to students' memory and understanding of the lecture content than just mind wandering. The researchers think this is because it's easier for students to split their attention between the lecture and their own internal thoughts (mind wandering) than it is to split their attention between the lecture and using devices like phones or laptops for unrelated activities (media multitasking). When students are media multitasking, they can't as easily allocate "partial resources" to both the lecture and the device use, compared to how they can allocate some attention to both the lecture and their own thoughts during mind wandering. So media multitasking during lectures seems to be particularly detrimental to students' learning and retention of the material, more so than just letting their minds wander. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MEDIA MULTITASKING 3 Other studies have also found that media multitasking during lectures and educational activities has negative effects on students' attention and memory. The negative impact of media multitasking on memory is not surprising, since we know that dividing your attention between multiple tasks while studying or encoding information tends to hurt your memory. This is a specific, task-related effect. But the more interesting question is whether chronic or frequent media multitasking might also lead to more broad, general deficits in memory, even when the person is not actively multitasking at the time. Some research has suggested this may be the case - that extensive media multitasking habits could be linked to poorer memory performance overall, even when the person is focused on a single task. There is particularly strong evidence supporting this idea of domain-general memory deficits associated with chronic media multitasking. So the negative impacts of media multitasking on attention and learning seem to go beyond just the specific situations where the multitasking is occurring. Frequent media multitasking habits may have wider-ranging detrimental effects on memory and cognition. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MEDIA MULTITASKING 4 The research suggests that chronic, frequent media multitasking may lead to a kind of persisting "absentmindedness" or lack of focus that negatively impacts a person's memory and cognitive abilities across various everyday tasks and situations. In other words, the frequent media multitasking habits could be causing more general, widespread deficits in memory and attention, not just problems in the specific moments when someone is actively multitasking. However, it's also possible that the relationship works the other way around. Maybe people who are naturally more prone to absentmindedness and attention problems are also more likely to engage in a lot of media multitasking as a result. So the big question that future research needs to figure out is the direction of causality - does chronic media multitasking lead to more general cognitive deficits, or do pre-existing attention/memory problems lead people to media multitask more? Sorting out this causal relationship is an important goal for further studies on the impacts of media multitasking habits. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HOT CAR DEATHS Everyday absentminded mistakes are often linked to problems with prospective memory - which is the ability to remember to carry out planned actions in the future. Prospective memory can be divided into two main types: 1) Time-based prospective memory - remembering to do something at a specific future time. 2) Event-based prospective memory - remembering to do something when a specific future event or cue occurs. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HOT CAR DEATHS 2 One very tragic example of a time-based prospective memory failure is the phenomenon of "hot car deaths" - where parents accidentally forget that their infant is still in the car, and the child becomes trapped and dies from the high temperatures. In these cases, the parents are completely unaware that they have left their child in the hot car, unlike situations where a parent knowingly leaves a child in the car to run an errand. So these "hot car deaths" are essentially a devastating result of people forgetting their intended future action (to take the child out of the car) due to a breakdown in their time-based prospective memory. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HOT CAR DEATHS 3 There are a few key factors that seem to come up repeatedly in the tragic cases of parents forgetting their child is in the hot car: The parents are usually caring, responsible people - not just chronically "absent-minded" people. This isn't a regular occurrence for them. There's often a change in their normal routine, where the parent automatically goes through the usual steps without realizing they need to do something different. The parent is often very focused on some other pressing matter, like work or a personal problem, and isn't paying full attention. There's no clear reminder or cue to trigger the parent to take the child out of the car at the right moment. Unlike mind wandering, this type of forgetting happens specifically at the time the action was supposed to be taken. This type of tragic forgetting only started happening more after child car seats were moved to the rear of the car in the 1990s. This removed the child from the parent's immediate line of sight, making it easier for them to accidentally forget the child was there. So it's a combination of disrupted routine, divided attention, and lack of a clear retrieval cue that seems to lead to these devastating incidents of absentminded forgetting. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HOT CAR DEATHS 4 The reason this type of tragic forgetting started happening more often is likely related to a change that was made in the 1990s. Child car seats were moved to the back of the car to protect kids from the airbags in the front. This change meant the child was no longer in the parent's direct line of sight. Before, the child's presence in the front seat would have acted as a constant visual reminder for the parent. But with the child now in the back, that visual cue was removed. It's perhaps not surprising that this led to more incidents of parents accidentally forgetting their child was in the car. It's an intuitively low-likelihood event - a parent forgetting their own child is with them. But studies on prospective memory show that having that kind of salient retrieval cue is really important for successfully remembering to do something in the future. Without that constant visual reminder of the child's presence, it becomes much easier for the parent's intended action of removing the child from the car to be forgotten in the moment, leading to these tragic outcomes. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : HOT CAR DEATHS 5 The legal consequences for parents involved in these tragic cases of forgetting a child in a hot car have varied a lot. Researchers are just starting to study the factors that impact how much blame is assigned in these cases. Despite the terrible outcomes, the fact that a missing reminder is a key part of this kind of absentminded forgetting means it can actually be overcome fairly straightforward. By providing an unavoidable reminder that a child is in the back seat, it turns it from being something the parent has to remember on their own (a "time-based" memory task) to something triggered by an external event (an "event-based" memory task). These reminders could be homemade, like a doll or toy in the front seat. Or they could be electronic devices like the Elepho eClip that attach to the car seat and send alerts to the driver's phone. Some car manufacturers are now also including rear seat reminder systems as optional features. However, there's a paradoxical issue that makes this kind of forgetting hard to eliminate. Parents need to be aware that it's even possible for this extreme kind of forgetting to happen in order to take steps to prevent it. But many parents just can't imagine it happening to them, and flatly reject the idea. So an important area for future research will be understanding these beliefs about the limits of absentminded forgetting, and figuring out how to change those beliefs so parents are open to using the available reminder systems to prevent these tragic incidents. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MISSING PERSON ALERTS Another area where absentminded forgetting can be a problem is with missing person alerts, like the AMBER alerts we sometimes see. These alerts are meant to get the public to help identify and find missing children or adults. However, these alerts are often criticized because they don't always lead to useful identifications of the missing person. As researchers have noted, a common strategy is to release photos of the missing person, hoping someone will recognize them and notify the authorities. But one factor that can contribute to these alerts failing is a specific type of memory failure called "prospective person memory." This is when you forget to take the action you intended, which in this case is recognizing and reporting the missing person if you see them. Studies have shown that prospective person memory is very vulnerable to being forgotten. Even when participants in experiments are specifically instructed to look out for a certain person, they often fail to identify that person later, even when the person is right in front of them. This happens even when the participants are given money as incentive to report seeing the person. So this difficulty in remembering to act on the intention to identify a specific missing person is likely one reason why these public alerts don't always lead to successful identifications. It's a form of absentminded forgetting that can have high stakes in these real-world situations. Part 2 - Three “sins of omission” : MISSING PERSON ALERTS Researchers have looked at why missing person alerts are often not very effective. They think it's related to problems with different aspects of this specific type of memory called "prospective person memory.“ This includes: Failing to actually pay attention to the alert in the first place Forgetting the intention to try to identify the missing person Not recognizing the missing person even if you do see them While all of these factors likely play a role, recent evidence has highlighted the importance of something called "strategic monitoring.“ This means actively using your attention to stay focused on the goal of searching for and recognizing the missing person. Participants in experiments who engaged in more strategic monitoring were better able to spot the target person. researchers suggest that an important next step would be to find ways to increase this strategic monitoring in real-world missing person cases. This could help make the public alerts more effective at leading to identifications of the missing individuals. Essentially, it comes down to the fact that without staying actively focused on the goal, people can absentmindedly fail to recognize the missing person, even if they're right in front of them. Proving that focused attention is key. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : M-S-B-P Refers to situations in which memory is present but either wrong or unwanted: misattribution (attributing a memory or idea to the wrong source), suggestibility (implanted memories that result from suggestion or misinformation), Bias (retrospective distortions produced by current knowledge, beliefs, and feelings), and persistence (intrusive remembering of disturbing experiences). Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : MISATTRIBUTION Misattribution happens when you remember something but incorrectly attribute it to the wrong source. For example, you may remember an idea but think it was your own, when actually you heard it from someone else. Suggestibility is when misinformation or misleading suggestions cause you to develop false memories. This always involves misattribution, because the false memories are attributed to the wrong source. Misattribution can occur without suggestibility, but memory errors caused by suggestibility always involve misattribution. These two concepts are closely related and often come up in real-world situations like eyewitness testimony and forensic interviews. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING Researchers have used ideas from cognitive psychology to study how clinicians (doctors, psychologists, etc.) use their knowledge and experience to make decisions and diagnose patients. Two key frameworks they've looked at are: Fuzzy trace theory - This says there are two types of mental representations: verbatim (exact details) and gist (general meanings). Experts tend to rely more on gist-based representations. Schema theory - This looks at how our organized knowledge affects how we encode and remember new information. Experts have more developed knowledge schemas. These frameworks have been applied to studying clinical decision-making. Compared to novices, expert clinicians tend to rely more on abstract, gist-based knowledge and their accumulated schemas. This can help them remember the big picture, but sometimes leads them to have poorer memory for specific details. More importantly, research shows experienced clinicians can be especially prone to false memories and misattribution errors when it comes to relevant information about diagnostics . Their existing knowledge can actually contribute to these memory errors. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING 2 In another experiment researchers compared how well experts (clinicians) and non-experts (undergraduate students) remembered information about fictional patient cases. They gave all the participants three different types of patient case descriptions: A simple case A complex case where the symptoms fit together well A complex case where the symptoms didn't fit together well After a short delay, they tested everyone's memory of the case details. The key findings were: The experts were able to recall more details from the case descriptions compared to the non-experts. However, experts also produced more false memories - recalling symptoms that were not actually in the cases, especially for the complex case where the symptoms didn't fit well together. The non-experts showed similar rates of false memories across all three case types. For the experts, they had the fewest false memories for the complex case where the symptoms fit well, but the most false memories for the complex case where the symptoms didn't fit. Researchers think the experts' increased false memories for the incoherent complex case happened because they were trying to "make sense" of it by fitting it into their existing knowledge schemas, even though the details didn't actually match. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING 3 Another study found similar results with undergraduate students - The researchers looked at how practicing clinicians and trainees remembered details from realistic patient case descriptions. The cases included information about traumatic or non-traumatic events, the patient's intense or mild reactions, and severe or mild subsequent behaviors. In a memory test, the participants had to identify which details they had actually seen versus which were similar but new details. The key findings were: Experienced clinicians had more trouble correctly identifying true versus false details compared to the trainees. The more clinical experience someone had, the worse their recognition accuracy was. Both experts and trainees had a harder time remembering cases where the patient's reaction did not make sense with what happened. They were more likely to change what they remembered to make the case seem more logical and consistent. But this wasn't always accurate - they were "fixing" their memory instead of remembering exactly what happened, even if it was strange or did not seem to match. Overall, this shows that the experts' extensive knowledge can actually lead them to distort their memories, making them more prone to these types of misattribution errors. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Internet, Social Media, and Fake News with the rise of the internet, smartphones, and social media, there has been increased interest and concern about inaccurate or misleading information, especially related to "fake news" that can spread misinformation. Some key findings from recent research include: The "illusory truth effect" - when a false statement is repeated, people are more likely to believe it is true, due to increased familiarity or fluency with the information, even if it is fake. Repeated exposure to fake news stories, even unlikely ones or those flagged as false, can lead people to believe they are true over time. Things like political beliefs and how people think can affect if they believe made-up news stories. People who think more carefully about things are less likely to believe fake stories. Providing warnings or debunking information can reduce the illusory truth effect for fake news, but the effect can still persist, especially for people who are inclined to believe the fake news aligns with their political views. This effect seems less likely to occur when the fake news is presented as a question rather than a statement. Fake news can also lead people to develop false memories about events that never actually happened. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Internet, Social Media, and Fake News 2 Research suggests that exposure to fake news stories, including highly realistic deepfake videos, can cause people to develop false memories about events that never actually happened. The research also indicates that being exposed to misleading poll questions can make people more likely to later develop false memories about associated fake news stories. This is a concerning finding, as it demonstrates how misinformation can spread and become perceived as reality in people's minds. Lastly our natural tendency to make new associations between pieces of information can make us more likely to think fake news is real. But just because someone recognizes something they've heard before; it doesn't mean they really believe it's true. There's a difference between thinking you've seen something and fully believing something is a fact. People may think they've heard a fake story before, but that doesn't mean they will believe the whole story is correct. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Eyewitness Identification Misattribution and suggestibility (Mistakenly thinking something happened or someone was involved) are big problems in law, as they often lead to wrongful convictions. DNA evidence showed mistaken eyewitness identification played a role in 69% of the first 375 cases where innocent people were found innocent. Over the last 20 years, how we understand eyewitness identification has changed a lot. One important change is comparing lineups where suspects are shown together versus one at a time. Early research said doing lineups one at a time reduces false identifications without reducing correct ones. But newer research looking at how people decide says lineups one at a time just make people more careful when picking, not better at telling innocent from guilty. This careful way of deciding raises questions about policies using lineups that lead to more cautious choices. This could reduce falsely identifying innocents but might also miss identifying some real criminals. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Implanted False Memories and Forensic Interviews The research on how comments after an event can mess with eyewitness memory connects to other studies on "false memories". This means people can start remembering things that never really happened after being told suggestive details. Some early studies found around 20-30% of people developed false memories of imaginary events they were shown. More recently, one study by Shaw and Porter said an even higher number - 70% - of people wrongly remembered committing a crime as a teen based on suggestive questions. But other scientists challenged how Shaw and Porter decided if the stories were real or fake memories. They say it's important to separate false memories, where people genuinely recall something that didn't happen, from just believing fake details without a real memory. When using stricter rules, only 25-30% in Shaw and Porter's study had developed false memories, similar to earlier research. The rest had formed false beliefs. In summary, suggestion and interviews can definitely plant false memories, though scientists still debate how often this happens and the best way to define fake vs real memories. Suggestion remains very powerful in changing what people think they recall. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Implanted False Memories and Forensic Interviews 2 Whether people developed false memories or just beliefs in the Shaw and Porter study is important for research. But their main finding that 70% came to believe a fake crime is still notable. This relates to "false confessions" where people wrongly think they committed a crime due to suggestive questioning. The Shaw and Porter method could help understand how these false beliefs form in real cases. We need good techniques to prevent false memories and beliefs. One idea is the "Cognitive Interview" where witnesses are questioned carefully without hints. It's been shown to help remember correctly in law and health. Researchers now made an "Artificial Intelligence Cognitive Interview" using chatbots and AI. In one study, it led to more right recalls and fewer mistakes than other methods. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Implanted False Memories and Forensic Interviews 2 Researchers found some ways to maybe lessen false memories that were put into people's minds. In one study, they first used tricky interview methods to give college students fake memories of realsounding past events. They also talked about the students' true memories. Then they tried two things to reduce the fake memories without affecting the real ones: 1. Reminding people that memories can come from photos or stories, not just what they experienced. 2. Telling them repeated questions can make fake memories and to say if they think that happened to one. Even after that, some students still partly believed the made-up events. The researchers thought this was from lingering fake beliefs, not full fake memories - It's important to know the difference between truly remembering something false versus just believing fake details without real memory of it. This shows implanted fake memories may sometimes be lessened a bit. It demonstrates fake memories planted deep might not be impossible to undo in some cases. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence Memories that won't go away and cause upsetting feelings are called "persistent intrusive memories." They often come from traumatic or scary events and can affect mental health. They are sometimes linked to PTSD. Researchers have learned more about what causes these types of memories and how to treat them. They used this basic knowledge to help people manage intrusive memories in therapy. Two examples involve studies on: 1. Changing or updating distressing memories when they come back up. 2. Helping people purposely block or stop unwanted memories. Understanding these intrusive memories better makes it easier to treat PTSD symptoms with therapy, as well ending persistent, distressing memories that spoil mood to improve well-being. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence and Memory Reconsolidation Scientists found that memories in animals can be changed when brought back to mind. This is called "memory reconsolidation." During this window, the memory can be disrupted by certain drugs that mess with the first forming of that memory. Research looked at using propranolol, a drug affecting emotional memories, to modify distressing memories in people. This was done by bringing back bad memories from trauma and giving the drug either before or after. The hope was to weaken upsetting intrusive memories related to PTSD. Case reports found it helped reduce certain memories for PTSD patients. And clinical trials tested if it lessened intrusive memories and PTSD symptoms in people with the disorder or just bad past experiences. - The results were mixed. One analysis saw some evidence it could lower flashbacks and related things in PTSD patients and others. But another bigger look found no overall effect on PTSD symptoms. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence and Memory Reconsolidation 2 Researchers tested the idea of using Tetris on real people who went through accidents or trauma, beyond just experiments. In one study, they worked with car crash victims at the hospital. Some people recalled the worst parts of the crash and then played Tetris. Others just wrote about the crash instead of playing. Over the next week, everyone tracked bad flashbacks of the crash in their diary. The Tetris group reported fewer flashbacks than the other group. In another study, different types of trauma survivors used an app after recalling their experience. Some recalled and played Tetris, others listened to a podcast. Again, the Tetris group reported fewer upsetting memories both one week and five weeks later compared to the podcast group. So, these real-world studies matched what was found before with experiments—playing Tetris after recalling trauma seemed to reduce distressing flashbacks. This suggests it may help lessen intrusive memories from upsetting experiences. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence and Memory Reconsolidation 3 The studies before looked at reducing very new upsetting flashbacks. But researchers also tried it on older, long-lasting distressing memories. One study used Tetris successfully on 20-year-old PTSD memories. Another saw similar results for women with childhood trauma memories. So, this approach seemed to work not just for recent bad experiences, but older, deep-rooted flashbacks too. We don't fully know how Tetris disrupts how trauma memories form again. But the important part is this method has proved to help manage flashbacks from past trauma in real life. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence and Memory Suppression The earlier research looked at using Tetris to reduce flashbacks from recent bad events. Another area of study looks at a different approach called "think-no think." In these studies, people learn word pairs. Then they see one word and are told to recall or try not to think about the other word. The early findings showed people could get better at suppressing the second word when told not to think about it. Later studies didn't fully confirm this memory blocking effect, but it seems people can learn to hold back certain memories to some degree. Importantly, people with PTSD have a harder time with this memory suppression task compared to others. They struggle more with unwanted flashbacks. The studies also looked at brain activity patterns during memory blocking. So this research helps understand the mind and brain processes involved in controlling undesirable memories. Along with Tetris studies, it provides insights that could aid managing distressing flashbacks. Both areas look at reducing hard to forget memories. Part 3 - Four “sins of Commission” : Persistence and Memory Suppression 2 The study found all groups got better at blocking memories with practice. They then did a quick picture test. For people without PTSD, suppressing memories in the first task made it harder to pick out those pictures later. But for the PTSD group, suppressing memories didn't affect their picture identification in the same way. Their hidden memories were less impacted. The researchers also looked at brain activity. The PTSD group's brain regions involved in thinking control and memory communicated differently than the other groups. In summary, while everyone learned to block memories on purpose, the PTSD group showed problems controlling memories in both their behavior and brain patterns. This provides insight into understanding why PTSD makes it hard to manage unwanted memories. It could help guide new therapy targeting these control issues. Even small memory control differences are important to study for mental health problems. Part 4 – The Conclusion: Understanding the Adaptive Nature of Memory Errors Memory is an incredible ability that allows us to learn from past experiences and apply those lessons to navigate the present and future. However, it is not perfect, as exhibited by the well-documented "seven sins of memory" - phenomena like forgetting, distortion, bias, and intrusive memories that can negatively impact our recall and decision-making. Traditionally, these quirks have been viewed primarily as flaws that reveal the fallibility of human memory. However, as explored in this insightful paper, there is an alternative perspective worth considering - that many memory errors and sins in fact arise from adaptive functions that served us well evolutionarily. Rather than seeing memory errors as solely defects, the author argues they may help us in important ways. For instance, forgetting certain details and distorting memories over time aids in constructing simulated scenarios to prepare for potential futures. Intrusive memories, while distressing, help reinforce learning about survival-relevant threats. Brain research findings support memory possessing adaptive mechanisms, rather than reflecting random defects. This view provides a more balanced understanding versus the myopic focus on memory's pitfalls. Part 4 – The Conclusion: Understanding the Adaptive Nature of Memory Errors Over the past 20 years, evidence increasingly shows memory errors typically do not indicate hopeless unreliability, but instead emerge from memory design features that facilitated our ancestors' survival and reproduction. For example, studies demonstrate people with PTSD exhibit impaired cognitive control of memories - not due to a solely flaw-based weakness, but an adaptive trait gone awry due to environmental mismatch. Such work shifts perceptions of memory sins from flaws to byproducts of memory serving broader functional roles. While memory errors do carry real-world consequences sometimes requiring mitigation, it is critical not to lose sight of memory's overwhelmingly adaptive capacities due to a small number of headlinegrabbing failures. Continued research recognizimg both benefits and limitations, guided by an adaptive perspective, can further illuminate the nature and impacts of memory sins while appreciating memory's importance. This balanced approach holds promise for enhancing understanding and developing evidence-based recommendations or interventions to address memory-related challenges faced by individuals or society. In summary, the author presents a thought-provoking reconceptualization of memory errors as adaptations gone awry rather than inherent flaws alone. Far from indicating hopeless unreliability, an adaptive viewpoint recognizes both upsides and downsides of human memory processes and outcomes. It offers a framework for ongoing progressive research on this important topic. Part 4 – The Conclusion: Understanding and Strengthening Your Memory Our memories allow us to learn from the past and function in the present. However, human memory is not perfect. It can be affected by what scientists call the "seven sins of memory" - things like forgetting, distortions, intrusive thoughts, and more. In the past, these quirks were seen only as flaws. But recent research shows a more positive view - that they may actually serve important purposes too. While memory issues can cause problems, it's important to remember that memory generally works very well! Only in rare situations do errors have severe effects. So instead of feeling memory is "broken", it helps to understand memory blessings and limitations. Our brains evolved with memory abilities that helped our ancestors survive, even if they aren't flawless. There are some simple things you can do to support your memory and avoid issues: Pay attention to new information in different ways like seeing, hearing and doing. This makes memories stronger. Study new things in several short sessions over days, not all at once. This spaced practice helps memory last. Get 7 to 9 hours of sleep each night. Sleep is when the brain strengthens memories. Limit stress as much as you can. High stress isn't good for memory functions. Check facts from trusted sources before accepting all details about past events. With trauma memories, discuss them gradually with a counselor, not all at once. Do memory games and puzzles regularly like word searches or crosswords. See a doctor if memory troubles interfere a lot with daily life. Some issues may have treatments. By understanding memory more fully as both a blessing and something complex, you can reduce problems and enhance it. Don't get discouraged by its imperfections - focus on also recognizing abilities it provides. With simple lifestyle choices, you can care for your memory and keep serving the important tasks it makes possible each day. Overall, memory allows us to learn from history and live fully in the present. Part 4 – The Conclusion : Understanding the Adaptive Nature of Memory: A Balanced Perspective Memory is an intricate yet indispensable ability that allows us to learn from past experiences and apply those lessons as we navigate life. However, it would be inaccurate to portray human memory as perfect or flawless. Over decades of research, psychologists have identified a variety of common memory phenomena, such as forgetting, distortion, and the intrusion of unintended thoughts, that reveal the imperfections and complexities of this cognitive system. Traditionally, such quirks have been characterized primarily as weaknesses or errors indicating the fallible nature of memory. More recently, though, some researchers have proposed shifting to a more nuanced view - that many apparent memory "sins" could also arise from adaptive functions that served important evolutionary purposes. A perspective I find particularly thought-provoking. Rather than a straightforward dichotomy of perfection versus imperfection, this adaptive framework recognizes memory's dual nature, with both advantages and limitations. It acknowledges that while memory errors can carry real-world costs, our ability to recall past experiences also overwhelmingly supports daily life in essential ways. This alternative lens is supported by evidence that seemingly detrimental memory processes, like certain types of forgetting or reconstructive recollection, may actually facilitate future-oriented simulation and planning. Intrusive recollections, too, serve an adaptive role in reinforcing survival-salient learning. Even reconstructive errors could aid in navigating similar future scenarios based on prior experiences. Brain research findings corroborate memory possessing mechanisms attuned to adaptability rather than random defects. Moving forward, I believe memory research has much to gain by embracing this balanced, complex view. While continued study of episodic intrusions, distortions and other "sins" is prudent given real impacts, an adaptive lens need not lose sight of memory's broader gifts. It offers a framework recognizing both benefits and limits, better guiding work on key issues without diminishing memory's critical roles. Ultimately, this perspective presents a thought-provoking reconsideration - that even subtle "errors" in memory may reflect its ingenious yet imperfect design for maximizing survival in a Changeable world.
