The Effect of a Story Context on False Recognition in the DRM-paradigm

2021 ◽

pp. 174702182110564

Author(s):

Jacob Namias ◽

Mark Huff ◽

Allison Smith ◽

Nicholas Maxwell

Keyword(s):

Signal Detection ◽

False Memory ◽

False Recognition ◽

Recognition Accuracy ◽

Control Group ◽

Control Task ◽

Drm Paradigm ◽

Memory Accuracy ◽

Reduction Experiment ◽

Drawing Task

We examined the effects of drawing on correct and false recognition within the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) false memory paradigm. In Experiment 1, we compared drawing of a word’s referent using either a standard black pencil or colored pencils relative to a read-only control group. Relative to reading, drawing in either black or colored pencil similarly boosted correct recognition and reduced false recognition. Signal-detection analyses indicated that drawing reduced the amount of encoded memory information for critical lures and increased monitoring, indicating that both processes contributed to the false recognition reduction. Experiment 2 compared drawing of individual images of DRM list items relative to drawing integrated images using sets of DRM list items. False recognition was lower for drawing of individual images relative to integrated images—a pattern that reflected a decrease in encoded memory information but not monitoring. Therefore, drawing individual images improves memory accuracy in the DRM paradigm relative to a standard read-control task and an integrated drawing task, which we argue is due to the recruitment of item-specific processing.

Download Full-text

Item-specific and relational processing both improve recall accuracy in the DRM paradigm

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology ◽

10.1177/1747021818801427 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 72 (6) ◽

pp. 1493-1506 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Mark J Huff ◽

Glen E Bodner

Keyword(s):

Free Recall ◽

False Recognition ◽

Correct Recognition ◽

Relational Processing ◽

Drm Paradigm ◽

Recall Accuracy ◽

Relational Encoding ◽

Task Difference

Using the Deese–Roediger–McDermott (DRM) paradigm, Huff and Bodner found that both item-specific and relational variants of a task improved correct recognition, but only the item-specific variants reduced false recognition, relative to a read-control condition. Here, we examined the outcome pattern when memory was tested using free recall, using the same item-specific versus relational task variants across three experiments as our previous study (processing instructions, pleasantness ratings, anagram generation). The outcome pattern in recall was similar to recognition, except relational processing at study actually reduced the DRM illusion, though not as much as item-specific processing. To reconcile this task difference, we suggest that the memory information laid down during relational encoding enhances the familiarity of the critical items at test. To the extent that familiarity is used less as a basis for responding in free recall than in recognition, relational processing ironically reduces rather than increases the DRM illusion in recall.

Download Full-text

Does Test Type Influence False Recognition in the DRM Paradigm? Comparison of the Yes/No Recognition Test and Two-Alternative Forced-Choice Test

The American Journal of Psychology ◽

10.5406/amerjpsyc.133.1.0049 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 133 (1) ◽

pp. 49

Author(s):

Ulatowska ◽

Olszewska ◽

Hanson

Keyword(s):

Recognition Test ◽

False Recognition ◽

Forced Choice ◽

Choice Test ◽

Drm Paradigm ◽

Test Type

Download Full-text

Questioning the Role of Forward Associative Strength in False Memories: Evidence From Deese-Roediger-McDermott Lists With Three Critical Lures

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724594 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Maria Soledad Beato ◽

Jason Arndt

Keyword(s):

False Memory ◽

Associative Strength ◽

False Recognition ◽

False Memories ◽

Free Association ◽

Strong Relationship ◽

Drm Paradigm ◽

Backward Associative Strength

We report an experiment examining the factors that produce false recognition in the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. We selectively manipulated the probability that critical lures produce study items in free association, known as forward associative strength (FAS), while controlling the probability that study items produce critical lures in free association, known as backward associative strength (BAS). Results showed that false recognition of critical lures failed to differ between strong and weak FAS conditions. Follow-up correlational analyses further supported this outcome, showing that FAS was not correlated with false recognition, despite substantial variability in both variables across our stimulus sets. However, these correlational analyses did produce a significant and strong relationship between BAS and false recognition. These results support views that propose false memory is produced by activation spreading from study items to critical lures during encoding, which leads critical lures to be confused with episodically-experienced events.

Download Full-text

Reducing False Recognition in the Deese-Roediger/McDermott Paradigm: Related Lures Reveal How Distinctive Encoding Improves Encoding and Monitoring Processes

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2020.602347 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 ◽

Author(s):

Mark J. Huff ◽

Glen E. Bodner ◽

Matthew R. Gretz

Keyword(s):

Signal Detection ◽

Recognition Test ◽

Test Generation ◽

False Recognition ◽

Correct Recognition ◽

Control Group ◽

Drm Paradigm ◽

Generation Task ◽

Retrieval Processes ◽

Memory Monitoring

In the Deese-Roediger/McDermott (DRM) paradigm, distinctive encoding of list items typically reduces false recognition of critical lures relative to a read-only control. This reduction can be due to enhanced item-specific processing, reduced relational processing, and/or increased test-based monitoring. However, it is unclear whether distinctive encoding reduces false recognition in a selective or global manner. To examine this question, participants studied DRM lists using a distinctive item-specific anagram generation task and then completed a recognition test which included both DRM critical lures and either strongly related lures (Experiment 1) or weakly related lures (Experiment 2). Compared to a read-control group, the generate groups showed increased correct recognition and decreased false recognition of all lure types. We then estimated the separate contributions of encoding and retrieval processes using signal-detection indices. Generation improved correct recognition by both increasing encoding of memory information for list words and by increasing memory monitoring at test. Generation reduced false recognition by reducing the encoding of memory information and by increasing memory monitoring at test. The reduction in false recognition was equivalent for critical lures and related lures, indicating that generation globally reduces the encoding of related non-presented items at study (not just critical lures), while globally increasing list-theme-based monitoring at test.

Download Full-text