Acts of generating and their sources: Predicting the effects of imagery encoding on false recognition errors

Abstract

In the two experiments reported here the basis of the beneficial effects of generating images on false recognition errors is investigated. Acts of generating (descriptions, images, or both) were manipulated while examining the effects of the source of descriptions guiding imagery generations (participant vs peer). False recognition errors were relatively high across encoding conditions except when imagery generations were based on participants' own descriptions (Experiments 1 and 2). These differences in the acts of generating were not attributable to differences in the cohesiveness of descriptions themselves. Acts of generating led to greater "remember" responses than "know" responses only when participants were not the source of the descriptions used to generate images (Experiment 2). Results highlight the importance of examining the effects of the source of descriptions for guiding imagery (participant or peer) when testing predictions about the effects of imagery encoding on false recognition errors.

Autobiographical Elaboration and the DRM Illusion: Investigating the Content and Process of Lure Activations

“…Consistent with this possibility are studies showing that participants falsely report seeing objects appropriate to, but not actually embedded in, complex visual scenes (Brewer & Treyens, 1981;Malmstrom & LaVoie, 2002). To investigate imagery processing effects more directly, Foley et al (2012) asked some participants to visualize DRM scene descriptions. Results suggested that the act of deliberately creating images of self-generated descriptions greatly reduced falserecognition errors (.18;Foley et al, 2012, Experiment 2).…”

“…We manipulated imagery instructions to extend the work of Foley et al (2012Foley et al ( , 2009Foley et al ( , 2006 to autobiographical elaboration of DRM materials. We investigated the lure activation process by providing guided imagery instructions to some participants while others comprised a spontaneous imagery condition.…”

“…Worth noting, however, is that error levels for the standard, shallow, and deep encoding conditions were all high (.72, .78, and .72, respectively). Foley et al (2012Foley et al ( , 2009Foley et al ( , 2006 further modified DRM procedures to examine self-generated, richly textured materials for content effects on lures. Rather than reading predetermined narratives, some participants in these studies generated scene descriptions based on subsets of DRM items.…”

Collaborative encoding and memory accuracy: Examining the effects of interactive components of co-construction processes.

“…The test construction was based on procedures used by researchers investigating the effects of pictorial (e.g., Israel & Schacter, 1997) and imagery (e.g., Foley et al, 2012; encoding on false memory rates. The 64-item memory test consisted of four kinds of test items: (a) 30 of the words presented during encoding were selected, three from each of the 10 presented lists, referred to here as presented instances; (b) 10 nonpresented This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Setting the Records Straight: Impossible Memories and the Persistence of Their Phenomenological Qualities

“…Thus, it was possible to code participants' spontaneous responses to each item and to examine the potential relationship between these responses and memory accuracy. In these studies involving the modified procedure, there was compelling evidence for the activation of spontaneous, self-referential activations about prior personal experiences (e.g., Foley et al, 2014;Foley et al, 2012). This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”