Are children’s memory illusions created differently from those of adults? Evidence from levels-of-processing and divided attention paradigms

Abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link IN PRESS Journal of Experimental Child Psychology AbstractIn two experiments we investigated the robustness and automaticity of adults' and children's generation of false memories by using a levels-of-processing paradigm (Experiment 1) and a divided-attention paradigm (Experiment 2). The first experiment revealed that when information was encoded at a shallow level, true recognition rates decreased for all ages. For false recognition, when information was encoded on a shallow level we found a different pattern for young children compared to older children and adults. Seven-year-olds' false recognition rates were related to the overall amount correctly remembered information whereas no such association was found for the other age groups. In the second experiment divided attention decreased true recognition for all ages. In contrast, children's (7-and 11-year-olds) false recognition rates were again dependent on the overall amount correctly remembered whereas adults' false recognition was left unaffected. Overall, children's false recognition rates changed when levels-ofprocessing or divided-attention was manipulated in comparison to adults. Together these results suggest that there may be both quantitative and qualitative changes in false memory rates with age.

The development of automatic and controlled inhibitory retrieval processes in true and false recall

“…It is also important to note that age-related increases in false memories (e.g., Brainerd et al, 2008) were not quite as evident in Experiments 2 and 3, similar to other recent reports of developmentally invariant false memory effects (see Bouwmeester & Verkoeijen, 2010;Wimmer & Howe, 2010). We give two possible explanations for this.…”

“…However, as Wimmer and Howe (2010) found, the memory advantage for self-generated (consciously recognized as internally generated) disappears if associative information is activated automatically outside of conscious control. As we used the standard DRM task with no metamemorial strategy, it is more likely that the reduction in false recall caused by the directed forgetting instruction (that occurred for children but not adults) was a retrieval inhibition effect rather than a memory editing strategy.…”

“…Interestingly, however, when associations mapped specifically onto their knowledge base, children as young as five years were able to generate fairly automatic associates. Wimmer and Howe (2010) further assessed the robustness of children's and adults' false memories at the encoding stage. Manipulating levels-of-processing and divided attention at study reduced both adults' and children's true memories.…”

“…In contrast to adults, children's false recognition was less robust under divided attention and shallow processing. Wimmer and Howe (2010) argued that there are some qualitative differences in children's and adults' false memories at the encoding stage. Results from both studies suggest that, consistent with predictions from the associative-activation theory, during the encoding phase, automaticity of associative activation increases with age and the false memories produced by children differ not only quantitatively but also qualitatively depending on corresponding age differences in the knowledge base.…”

Test-induced priming increases false recognition in older but not younger children

“…According to associative activation theory (AAT: Howe et al, 2009), false memories are caused by the activation of associates of the list items. Developed from the activation-monitoring account proposed by Roediger et al (2001), AAT attributes the developmental increase in false memories to the increasing automaticity with which associates are activated , 2010. According to FTT , false memories increase with age because children are less able than adults to extract the gist traces of DRM lists.…”