Appropriating the actions of another: Implications for children's memory and learning

Foley, Mary Ann; Passalacqua, Carmella; Ratner, Hilary Horn

doi:10.1016/s0885-2014(05)80001-2

Cited by 39 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the children in the Story condition later remembered the pictures better than those in the Standard condition, the Story children were more confused than were the Standard children regarding whether they had traced or imagined has done in a goal-oriented, collaborative task (e.g., Foley & Johnson, 1985;Foley et al, 1983;Foley et al, 1993a;Roberts & Blades, 1998). Compared to older children, those younger than 6 years make more errors in self-other source monitoring and there is a bias to exaggerate their responsibility in the task (Foley et al, 1993a;Roberts & Blades, 1998). In one study (Foley et al, 1993a, Experiment 1), 4-, 6-, and 8-year-olds alternated placing pieces on a board to make a collage of a familiar animal.…”

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…When later asked who placed which pieces on the board, the preschoolers more often inaccurately claimed that they had placed the adults' pieces on the board than did the older children. Interestingly, this "I did it" bias is only observed in such collaborative, goal-oriented contexts as building a collage together; when the adult began the collage but then allowed the child to complete it alone (i.e., when only the child's goal was driving performance), the bias was not evidenced (Foley et al, 1993a, Experiment 3).…”

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Young children are prone to later mistakenly claiming that they carried out their partner's actions (colloquially known as the "I did it" bias; Foley, Ratner, & Passalacqua, 1993a), possibly because the children were recoding their partner's actions as if the children carried out the actions themselves. Foley and Ratner have argued that the perspective adopted (e.g., first-person, third-person) and the goals of the task affect the prospective processing carried out during the task, and that the preservation of source information is not central to the purpose of collaborative and goal-directed tasks.…”

Section: Theories Of Source Monitoring Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At test, the cognitive operations (anticipations) that are retrieved for the partners' actions resemble those of self-performed actions (Foley & Ratner, 1998a;Foley et al, 1993a). Manipulations of the recoding process result in predictable effects on the presence and strength of the bias.…”

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

Roberts

2002

Developmental Review

100

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying the sources of memories (e.g., who carried out an action, whether an event happened or was suggested, when an instance of a repeated event occurred) is an important skill in providing accurate accounts of events in forensic investigations. Sensitivity to the nature and development of children's source-monitoring skills can inform interviewing practices. Five perspectives addressing alternate aspects of the development of children's source monitoring are outlined (source-monitoring theory, fuzzy-trace theory, schema theory, the person-based perspective, and the mental-state reasoning model). Six main areas of empirical research stemming from these theories are then discussed with emphasis on how the findings relate to the forensic arena: The similarity of sources, the identity of the agent, prospective processing, the relation of source monitoring to other cognitive skills, metacognitive understanding, and the stringency of source-monitoring decisions. The research reviewed is used to address two main applications to forensic investigations: (a) expectations of child witnesses, and (b) interviewing protocols.Children's ability to distinguish 3 Children's Ability To Distinguish Between Memories From Multiple Sources: Implications For The Quality And Accuracy Of Eyewitness StatementsOne of the most important investigative tools in forensics is the interview. Interviewing victims of and witnesses to crimes is especially important in investigations where there is little physical evidence and the main evidence therefore comes from eyewitness accounts. Concern has been raised about the reliability of eyewitness testimony, however, because many factors can have adverse effects on the length, quality, and accuracy of testimony. In addition to providing an accurate account of exactly what transpired during a crime, witnesses must also accurately identify the sources or origins of event details. Examples include identifying the source of an action (e.g., Who did it, Perpetrator A or Perpetrator B?), the source of a voice (e.g., Who said it, me or the perpetrator?), the reality status of a past event (e.g., Did it really happen or did I just dream it? Did I really see it happen or did I just hear about it?), and identifying one incident from a series of incidents (e.g., Did he touch me the first time he babysat or the last time he babysat? Did he touch me in the bedroom or the bathroom?). In all of these examples, child victims and witnesses must retrieve their memories and identify the precise source of those memories. Research on the development of such "source monitoring" (Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993; can provide us with accurate expectations of child witnesses' capabilities, contribute to the development of appropriate interviewing protocols, and shed light on interviewers' judgments of child witnesses' credibility.There are numerous source distinctions relevant to the forensic arena (see Table 1 for examples). Witnesses need to monitor various sources contained in a target incident (i.e., t...

show abstract

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Theories Of Source Monitoring Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prospective Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

Roberts

2002

Developmental Review

100

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As we mentioned, when participants collaborate during encoding, they may later experience confusions regarding the source of the contributions , sometimes claiming credit for their partner's contributions (Barber, Franklin, et al, 2010;Foley, Ratner, & Passalacqua, 1993). Manipulations that preclude or minimize opportunities for anticipation reduce or eliminate these memory confusions (Foley & Ratner, 1998;Foley, Ratner, & House, 2002;Landau & Marsh, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

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

Foley¹,

Fried²,

Cowan³

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2 experiments, the effect of collaborative encoding on memory was examined by testing 2 interactive components of co-construction processes. One component focused on the nature of the interactive exchange between collaborators: As the partners worked together to create descriptions about ways to interact with familiar objects, constraints were imposed on the interactions by requiring them to take turns (Experiment 1) or to interact without constraints (Experiment 2). The nature of the relationship between partners was manipulated as well by including 2 pair types, friends or unfamiliar peers (Experiments 1 and 2). Interactive component effects were found to influence spontaneous activations through content analyses of participants’ descriptions, the patterns of false recognition errors, and the relationship between content and errors. The findings highlight the value of examining the content of participants’ collaborative efforts when assessing the effects of collaborative encoding on memory and point to mechanisms mediating collaboration’s effects. Because the interactions occurred within the context of an imagery generation task, the findings are also intriguing because of their implications for the use of guided imagery techniques that incorporate co-construction processes.

show abstract

Children's Memory for Source

Foley

2013

The Wiley Handbook on the Development of Children's Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appropriating the actions of another: Implications for children's memory and learning

Cited by 39 publications

References 29 publications

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

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

Children's Memory for Source

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About