Lost in the Mall? Interrogating Judgements of False Memory

ABSTRACT Loftus and Pickrell's (1995) famous ‘Lost in the Mall’ false memory implantation experiment was recently replicated in Ireland. In this new study standard investigator judgements indicated many more false memories than did participants themselves, consistent with similar studies. We reanalysed the transcripts with investigator‐judged false memories, focusing on recall of six suggested core details. On average, fewer than two details in the fake event were explicitly recalled; 20% with full and 58% with partial false memories did not recall being lost. Participants' own self‐reported recall was associated with remembering more details. Half the participants described potentially true experiences, distinguishable from the fake event; this group recalled more suggested details but tended to remember them differently. The data suggested investigator ratings reflect individual comments made when participants are considering whether they remember different elements of the fake event but may not capture the way these comments are integrated in participants' own recall decisions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.70012
Citations
13
Primary Topic
Memory Processes and Influences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.46
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Lost in the Mall? Interrogating Judgements of False Memory

Chris R. Brewin, Bernice Andrews
13 citations
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Memory Processes and Influences
4.46
article

Lost in the Mall? Interrogating Judgements of False Memory

Chris R. Brewin, Bernice Andrews
article en
13 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Loftus and Pickrell's (1995) famous ‘Lost in the Mall’ false memory implantation experiment was recently replicated in Ireland. In this new study standard investigator judgements indicated many more false memories than did participants themselves, consistent with similar studies. We reanalysed the transcripts with investigator‐judged false memories, focusing on recall of six suggested core details. On average, fewer than two details in the fake event were explicitly recalled; 20% with full and 58% with partial false memories did not recall being lost. Participants' own self‐reported recall was associated with remembering more details. Half the participants described potentially true experiences, distinguishable from the fake event; this group recalled more suggested details but tended to remember them differently. The data suggested investigator ratings reflect individual comments made when participants are considering whether they remember different elements of the fake event but may not capture the way these comments are integrated in participants' own recall decisions.

Applied Cognitive PsychologyVol. 38(6)
Royal Holloway University of London (GB), University College London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Memory Processes and Influences
4.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.