Effects of study‐test modality on false recognition

Abstract

Many recent investigations of false memories have generally followed Roediger & McDermott (1995) in using auditory presentation at study and a visual recognition test; the results reveal high rates of false alarms to non‐studied lure words that are associatively related to studied words. We presented lists of words related to critical lure words either auditorially (A) or visually (V); recognition was tested either auditorially or visually, producing four study‐test conditions (AA, AV, VA, and VV). The false recognition rate for critical lures was higher following visual presentation (.76) than following auditory presentation (.35). Moreover, false recognition rates were higher when study and test modalities differed than when they matched (AV higher than AA; VA higher than VV). Correct recognition rate was actually exceeded by false recognition rate following visual presentation, whereas the reverse was the case following auditory presentation. For each word recognized as old (whether correctly or falsely), a remember know guess judgment was required. The proportion of words that were consciously recollected (i.e. remembered) was not significantly lower for false recognitions than for correct recognitions in any of the four conditions. It is concluded that false recognition can be reduced by factors that enhance correct recognition (auditory rather than visual presentation at study; same rather than different modality at study and at test), but when false recognition occurs, the subjective experience of remembering may be indistinguishable from correct recognition, regardless of study‐test modality.

Can test list context manipulations improve recognition accuracy in the DRM paradigm?

“…A more effective strategy for improving memory accuracy will likely require consideration of both encoding and test conditions. Specifically, increasing item-specific processing of list words at study, combined with cueing reliance on this distinctive processing at test, may improve correct recognition while attenuating the DRM illusion (e.g., Maylor & Mo, 1999).…”

Paradoxical effects of presentation modality on false memory

“…Maylor and Mo (1999) found that auditory study presentation increased true memory and decreased false memory as compared with visual study presentation. Although this finding is in line with some previous studies that have shown greater true memory after auditory than visual study presentation (e.g., Conway & Gathercole, 1987;Gathercole & Conway, 1988), it conflicts with the findings of many others.…”

Toward a frontal lobe disconnection model of deep dyslexia: The role of semantic feedback in phonological false memories

“…Smith and Hunt (1998) found that false memories increased following auditory presentation. Maylor and Mo (1999) reported the opposite. Trying to adjudicate between these, Gallo, McDermott, Percer, and Roediger (2001) failed to find a modality effect in one experiment and found increased false memories following auditory presentation in two other experiments (one within and one between subjects) only after discarding the distractor task and only when the test modality (in contrast to the study modality) was visual.…”