False Memories

Great Debates
1

In another thread, Libertarian asked:

I thought it was fodder for a new thread. But since Lib didn’t start it, I decided to.

Part of the implication is that eyewitness testimony just isn’t all that good. You can read a bit about this in the “Repressed Memories” thread: http://www.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/000832.html

Courts have, in the past, sent innocent people to jail based on false memories. People believe all sorts of things based on false memories of things they believe to have happened. For example, as I noted in the Repressed Memories thread, back in 1996, I wrote the following portion of a newsletter article about an article in Nature:

Exaggerated Testimony and the Indian Rope Trick

There was an interesting letter in Nature (9/13) regarding an investigation into how reliable personal testimony is when the claims are extraordinary.

In particular, the authors investigated the old (late nineteenth century) Indian rope trick, which generally is described as follows: A magician throws one end of a rope into the air; the rope remains rigid; a boy climbs up the rope and disappears at the top; the magician orders the boy to return, but he will not; the magician climbs up the rope with a knife and also disappears; the boy’s dismembered body parts fall to the ground and are then covered by the returning magician; when he removes the cover, the boy is magically restored. If this trick were ever done, it would, indeed, be quite extraordinary!

However, when people searched for magicians who could do the trick – sometimes offering great sums of money – nobody could be found. It was frequently suggested that witnesses had seen a simple street magic trick and then exaggerated it over time. The authors of this letter decided to see if that suggestion could be proven.

What they found was that there is, indeed, a correlation between the length of time between the observation of the trick and the complexity of the description of the trick. In other words, if a person saw the trick only a few years ago, he described it as being somewhat simpler (for example: boy climbs up rope; boy seems to disappear; boy reappears on rope) while somebody who saw it 30 years earlier had a much more complex memory of the trick, similar to what I described earlier.

Indeed, even those who had seen the trick only two years earlier exaggerated to some extent, as was proven when a witness showed a photograph to an investigator, who pointed out that it was not a rope at all, but a bamboo stick with a boy balancing on top of it.

It may seem a little silly to investigate a trick that was done last century, but I think it does have definite bearing on the reliability of witnesses when dealing with extraordinary claims. Simply put: extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof – witness statements simply will not do. And this investigation shows one very good reason why this is so.

====

So, while I don’t know what the implication will be in the future, I hope that people – especially the courts – will realize that memory is not perfect. It is not a VCR that you can just rewind and play back. Yes, we still need eyewitness testimony in the courts, and it certainly can be accurate sometimes. But we need to be careful.

What does anybody else think?

2

This is just a WAG, but isn’t it likely there’s a correlation between false memories and urban legends? People hear stories or jokes and over time transform them into ``memories’’ of real events.

I’m not trying to pick on Libertarian, but let’s take his Newlywed Game situation as an example. (For the sake of argument, I’m going to make up a scenario here, even though I understand Lib thinks his memory is accurate.)

Let’s assume he was watching the Newlywed Game one day and his roommate starts telling this really funny story about how one time a contestant said the strangest place he ever made whoopee was Up the butt, Bob.'' Bwah-ha-ha-ha! Then, over time, he mixes the memory of really watching the show with the memory of hearing the funny story and -- voila! -- an urban legend survives into the next generation, complete with a witness’’ who firmly believes he saw the episode.

How many other urban legends survive because people firmly believe they saw or heard something that never really happened?

To take a small example from my own life, I remember the shock of the Challenger explosion. I was watching the lift-off in the lobby of a college dorm when it happened. One of those, ``Do you remember where you were when …’’ situations. Except when I rack my brain over just what happened, I think maybe I was just passing through the lobby and saw a replay of the explosion. Perhaps I wasn’t watching as it happened. I’ll never be sure.

Memory is a tricky thing.

Up, up and away!

3

I suppose false memory can encompass everything from sustantially accurate recollections with a fuzzy detail or two to wholesale fabrications that are reinforced over time by some compelling motivation. The brain does not store data in the same reliable way that computers do. A memory is not a linear sequence of bits, but a tapestry of related associations. It’s not a photocopy, but an impressionist painting. And it has to be “repainted” every time it is recalled.

There seem to be any number of things that might contribute to a false memory of a given event: the way we “spin” what we observe, the filter of our world-view, the essential nature of the event, our emotional state at the time, and whether or not there is an associated memory that might taint this one. There are also, of course, our genetic proclivities, our mental capacity, and our prejudices, not to mention the intermingling of all our other experiences as we meander through time, which are bound to shade our memories.

But there is some grain of reality in all false memories, even those that are sheer fabrications, arising, as they had to, from other truer things that we remembered. We could do an experiment here if someone would write a brief but richly detailed exposition which, on our honor, each of us will read only once, wait a day, and then share our recollection of it.

4

I don’t have time to reply more fully right now, but I did want to note that Lib’s statement about there being a grain of reality to all false memories is simply not correct. Check out my articles on Bennett Braun for one example (see the Repressed Memories thread).

5

David:

Thanks. I went over there and read the articles, and I see what you mean. I was wrong. I don’t know why, but it never even dawned on me that someone might actually induce a false memory in someone else.

I cannot imagine a more heinous violation of the Noncoercion Principle. It is an emotional rape and a mental murder.

6

Precisely. Also not trying to pick on Lib, but that’s why it was the first thing that came to mind when he related his story. I know people who are sure they read an newspaper article about a woman being baked from the inside-out in a tanning booth. A check of that newspaper found nothing. (Now, I’m not saying newspapers never fall for urban legends – they do – but that one was a bit too much even for most papers!) Or the friend of mine who insisted that his old friend’s father was the one who had accidentally gotten the car that gets 100 miles per gallon and was offered big bucks by the car company to get it back so the could suppress it. He insisted that his friend’s father wouldn’t lie. I’m sure he wouldn’t. I’m also sure this guy wouldn’t. But I’m just as sure that it is a false memory due to an urban legend. (I’m even more sure now than I was then, because I know more about him and his personality and the way he thinks than I did at the time.)

Precisely. And usually, nobody ever thinks to question their own memories.

If you haven’t done so already, I encourage you to read the Repressed Memories thread. Felice posted about an experiment she does with her college class, showing just how faulty memory is and how easily it can be manipulated.

Lib said:

Precisely. Yet most people think of it more as a VCR. You tape what’s going on. Rewind. Run the tape. Etc. It just doesn’t work that way.

Most of the other things you wrote are correct as well, but I’m not going to bother quoting them just to say, “Yeah!” :slight_smile: And I already pointed out the problem with the “grain of truth.” However, I don’t think it only applies to the cases of implanted memories, depending on how you define that “grain of truth.” Is there a grain of truth in the story my friend told about the car? I don’t think so. Now, it could be argued that the grain is the urban legend, and he messed it up by somehow mixing it up in his mind with his friend’s father, but I think that’s stretching it a bit.

7

If I understand this correctly, and I am not prepared to do anything more than assert that I read this somewhere at this point (for self-evident reasons! :D), it is my understanding that a? the? commonly accepted theory regarding memory is that, when you commit something to memory, data are retained sufficient to “index” that memory, but when you “remember” something, the data are retrieved and supplemented by “filler” imagery to make up a “clear” memory. I.e., you remember that on May 10 last year, you went into that diner and ate the most disgusting hamburger you’ve ever had in your life – and got gum on the back of your good coat from the booth you occupied. You do not retain the memory of exactly where the sugar bowl was relative to the salt and pepper shakers, or the facial characteristics of the black lady sitting at the counter. If, some months later, it is disclosed that Maya Angelou was in town and ate at that diner during that week, you may “remember” the black lady at the counter as being her … even though it was not in fact her. And such memories are truly difficult to eradicate.

One of my earliest clear memories is of my aunt clipping our dog Gypsy, who died when I was 18 months old. The only problem with this is that she never did clip Gypsy, she clipped her own dog Chubby, who died at about the same time and was of the same breed (but easily distinguishable). My aunt and parents made this clear to me when I was about 10. Clearly I substituted dogs in the picture, inserting Gypsy, whom I loved, for Chubby, who was “just there.” Yet I can visualize Aunt June clipping Gypsy to this very day.

8

Poly, I think you pretty much described it correctly (or at least as good as anybody else describing memory). In fact, some of the false memories I have had (as referred to here, in the Repressed Memory thread, or the Butt thread – I can’t, um, remember which) were of just this sort. I knew that A and B happened and I was sure they happened together. However, when evidence was presented to show that they couldn’t have happened that way, I realized I must have been wrong.

9

Well, I made my way over here!

I assure you that I am as interested in and concerned about false memories as the next person, given what I do for a living. I was tangentially involved in a trial in Northern California about six years ago where the family – the father specifically, I think – sued a therapist who had induced false memories in his adult daughter to the effect that he had molested her when she was a girl. And, of course, there’s the famous McMartin pre-school fiasco.

OTOH, the court system in this country relies very heavily on eyewitness testimony; it is considered to be very strong evidence, one of the best pieces of evidence that you can present in support of your case. Juries will accept it at face value most of the time, unless you can show that the witness is lying or there is OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary. I was not kidding when I told David that two eyewitnesses could easily send him to the gas chamber for murder.

Now I wonder: is there any study that anybody can point us to regarding any “typical” false memory? I think what I’m getting at here is that the cases I’ve been involved with, and those which have gotten the most publicity, tend to be those where the person has a memory of something that happened quite some time ago, as opposed to the recent past. So that Poly may have a “false memory” of his aunt grooming his puppy back when he was a child, but probably doesn’t think that he has a memory of it happening two months ago.

I mentioned this in Lib’s thread, and so far it has kind of passed by. Lib’s recollection, true, is indefinite as to time, and is subject, IMHO, to more skepticism than Edlyn’s is for precisely that reason. Telling us that this is something he saw some years ago is different than Edlyn telling us that she saw it somewhere between September and December of this last year. Again, as I stated on the other thread, one of the policy reasons behind the right to a speedy (criminal) trial is based on the fact that witnesses’ memories fade over time.

So – accepting that someone could induce a false memory into someone regarding what happened when they were a child, or what happened several years ago, what is the likelihood of being able to induce a false memory into a mentally healthy and alert adult about something that happened just a couple of months ago? Particularly where that adult has no pre-disposed bias to believe one thing or another?

-Melin

10

Precisely. We ‘fill in’ our memories based on our generalizations and assumptions about the world.

I do another demonstration in which I show a picture of a puppy. The puppy is posed in profile so that you can only see one ear, which is brown and floppy. Then I put the picture away and later on ask people what color the dog’s ears are. They recall that they are both, of course, brown and floppy. When pushed, (Are you sure about that? Is that your final answer?) they struggle to recall the picture, and are very certain that yes, they saw both ears in the picture, and they were both brown. They are filling in information that was not actually present in the picture, based on a logical assumption that both of a dog’s ears are approximately the same color. There is nothing wrong with this sort of ‘mental shortcut’, by the way, it is an essential part of our ability to cope with the extreme complexity of the world-we assume regularities. As it happens, in this case the assumption is wrong- I have another picture of that dog which reveals that his other ear is, in fact, black and pointed. But people’s assumption, or ‘stereotype’ about dogs’ ears, which is that they are usually the same color, leads them to generate a false memory of a picture of a dog with the same colored ears.

11

Melin,

You raise a couple of interesting points. I would say that we ALWAYS have biases to believe one thing or another- we can’t help it, it’s part of how we cope with the world. The example I just posted: People are predisposed to believe puppies ears are the same color.

As for the in-class demo I use with the intruder- that’s easy to do. People have, perhaps, no particular disposition to believe the intruder was or was not wearing a hat. But what I do is prime the pot, by having someone who sounds like he knows what he’s talking about, say confidently, “He was wearing a hat”. That instantly biases people.
It’s even easier to bias people’s memories that way if you speak with a voice of official authority: a teacher, a counselor, a lawyer, etc. Which is why unscrupulous or biased therapists are so able to lead their patients into generating voluminous, elaborate false memories.

Before I sound like I’m blowing my own horn, I do it too. I recently had a discussion with a former roommate about a racquetball class he was taking. I have clear memories of him coming home from class absolutely exhausted, throwing his racket and sneakers on the floor, and flopping on the couch.
But as he pointed out- and he has the transcript to prove it- he took that class after I had already moved out. I only ever talked to him on the phone about it. Yet I can see it as clear as day. And that was only a couple of months back.

Felice

“There’s always a bigger fish.”

12

Interesting bunch of comments. Just to note how such interpretive events get started, Melin came to the obvious conclusion that my parents had gotten their baby boy a puppy, who died while he was still a toddler. Nope. Gypsy and Chubby died of old age back then…my aunt and my parents had gotten their dogs just before WWII, and by the time I came along they were quite old. Both dogs had floppy ears (both ears) the same color as they, a dark gray that looked black until examined very closely.

Now, what time was it when the red car went past the barn? :wink:

13

Melin, I know there have been some studies, but the number and effect is necessarily limited because causing false memories in humans isn’t something that is generally thought to be kosher. :slight_smile:

I know there was a study in which people were shown a videotape of an accident and asked about it. Some were asked if it was the blue car’s fault (or whatever) because the driver blew a stop sign. Later, they were asked about it again and definitely remembered a stop sign. Alas, no stop sign. So the memories can be altered fairly quickly, even in adults. (Similar tests have been done with children, but you specifically asked about adults.)

I don’t know of any research that discusses how quickly it could happen, but I think what is available does indicate that the more distant the event, the more likely the memory is messed up a bit. As I noted in the bit about the Indian Rope Trick, above: “What they found was that there is, indeed, a correlation between the length of time between the observation of the trick and the complexity of the description of the trick.” But even some of the recent ones had false memories (for example, thinking it was a rope when it was actually a bamboo stick).

The other thing that comes into play is that just because somebody thinks they remember it from recently doesn’t mean they really do. Talk about a trick of memory! But in all honesty, that could be part of the false memory – thinking it was much more recent than it actually was. I don’t have any studies on this, but I know it’s happened to me, personally. It happened to my father so much that it became a running joke (he kept saying things happened “about five years ago” when they were like 15 years ago – so now everything happened “about five years ago”).

I’ve also had a co-worker come into my office and insist that we had discussions that we never had. This is a couple weeks after the alleged discussions. This co-worker is a very busy guy. I’m fairly sure that another co-worker had a similar discussion with him and he transposed the discussion to me in his mind. Why don’t I assume I have just forgotten about it? Because there is other evidence in this case that makes it extrememly unlikely (the questions I supposedly asked are silly because I’ve known the answers to those questions for years, for example).

Also, in another case, this co-worker’s daughter was selling Girl Scout Cookies and mentioned he had extras. I told him that if he had extra Peanut Butter sandwiches, I’d take one. He brought in a box of mint cookies and got upset when I told him that I didn’t want those. He insisted that was what I’d told him. I pointed out that I’d already bought numerous boxes of mint cookies and so wouldn’t want any more. He, of course, believed his own memory. (I checked with another co-worker, who was there during the discussion, and he remembered me saying peanut butter, so it probably wasn’t a case of me mis-speaking.)

Now, don’t get me wrong. I like this co-worker. He is a hard worker and a really nice guy. But I know from experience that this hard work sometimes confuses some of the memories he has. So I just keep that in mind. (I’ve talked to a few other co-workers who have had similar experiences with him.) He’s not psychotic or anything, just a normal guy.

Incidentally, Melin, regarding the thing about two eyewitnesses sending me to the gas chamber – I don’t deny that you may be right. But, then, I refer back to our posts in the thread on the Death Penalty as to the number of innocent men we have on Death Row… :frowning:

14

THere’s a character in Heinlein’s ‘Stranger in a Strange Land’ whose title is “Fair Witness” or something like that. Her job is to report events as they happen, with no biases. IIRC (which is by no means certain :wink: )somebody asks her “what color is that house over there?” She looks, and replies, “It appears to be white on this side.”
And that, to be truly skeptical, is all we can really say.

Felice

“There’s always a bigger fish.”

15

Felice, yep, and her name is Anne. Elsewhere in the novel there are some short passages about how Fair Witnesses are trained (IIRC, using the discipline for Gestalt perception invented by Samuel Renshaw, which Heinlein had some enthusiasm for).

In view of the thread topic, do you think that posts here are going to see a lot of IIRC insertions? :slight_smile:

16

Incidentally, I was just working on something completely different and came upon another case of quick false-memory formation.

Many “psychics” make general guesses during their cold readings. For example, they will say, “Somebody whose name begins with ‘J’ is important.” Then the vict-- er, customer will say, “Oh, that’s Jeff, my ex-husband!” Later, when relating the story, the customer will often say, “She knew my ex-husband’s name! There’s no way she could have known that!” Well, she didn’t. You told her. But that’s not the way it’s remembered.

I’ve seen this in action numerous times. In one case, a skeptic actually went around with a TV reporter from psychic to psychic. The reporter, who believed in such things, would come out and say, “See! She knew things she couldn’t have known!” The skeptic would refer back to the tape they’d made of the session and point out how, in each case, the reporter had actually given the information, only to have it fed back to her. She didn’t remember it that way.

False memory creation in a snap.

17

Um . . . couple of thoughts.

David, I don’t think that your reporter example qualifies in the not-predisposed-to-be-biased category. :wink:

Felice, I’m not completely comfortable with your dog with the one ear story here. First, it doesn’t disprove what I said about “large details.” Everybody remembered they saw a dog, didn’t they? Nobody swore that it was a cat? Or that you didn’t show them a picture at all (at least of those who were paying attention)?

The other criticism – of the methodology, not of you, I hasten to add – is that it essentially tricked the students. You required them to make a decision about the ear, thus applying articial pressure on them to choose some description that they really DIDN’T remember and figured, consciously or otherwise, that they could extrapolate from what they perhaps did remember. Was “I just don’t remember?” an acceptable – and “safe” – option?

Back to Lib (Lib, aren’t you just thrilled you started all this?), we have no reason to believe that he was predisposed to have the memory he says he does, nor do we have anything to suggest that he had artificial pressure placed on him from some outside source forcing him to “choose” a memory.

Very interesting discussion going here!

-Melin

18

::sighing:: “articial” should, of course, be “artificial.”

David – same thing about the auto accident. People disagreed on the “small” details, but nobody denied that they had seen a car accident, did they?

-Melin

19

“Do I hyeah my name being bandied aboot idly?” — Dr. Zachary Smith, Lost in Space

20

I am unable to prove that I heard the above quote. The below quote, however…

“You are entitled to my opinions, and I will fight to the death for your right to agree with them.” — heard on January 18, 2000 at 4:32 PM Eastern Time from the movie Weapons of Mass Distraction, 1997, with Gabriel Byrne and Ben Kingsly that aired in the 4:30 PM to 6:15 PM time slot on HBO-C by Time-Warner Cable, thus documented this eighteenth day of the first month of the two-thousandth year of our Lord.