Imagery Induction Processes Differentially Impact Imagination Inflation

Abstract

Imagining a fictitious childhood event can lead to a false belief in that event’s occurrence, an effect called imagination inflation. However, the nature of imagery induction can vary considerably and such differences have not been systematically addressed in the literature. In the current study, participants provided confidence ratings for a series of events before and after imagery exercises. We manipulated imagery instructions (guided vs. prompted, a between-subjects factor) as well as event valence (positive vs. negative, a within-subjects factor). Results revealed inflation effects only under guided imagery instructions with negative events being the most susceptible to inflation. Interestingly, a portion of our sample (24%) experienced decreases in confidence following imagery or imagination deflation. Content analyses of imagery reports provided a more thorough understanding of inflation and deflation effects within a source monitoring framework.

Imagining Experiencing an Event in the Future Inflates Certainty That It Occurred in the Past

“…We included event valence as a factor because some studies have shown event valence affects imagination inflation (e.g., Bays et al., 2015). In a three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) that included event valence, it did not have a significant main effect on confidence rating changes, and it did not interact with any other variables.…”

“…However, we used different critical events in Experiments 1 and 2 and found similar effects of imagination inflation suggesting that our findings are generalizable. Because some studies have reported that event valence affects imagination inflation (e.g., Bays et al., 2015; Sharman & Barnier, 2008), we had participants imagine a combination of positive and negative events (and neutral events in Experiment 2). Event valence did not affect imagination inflation and it did not interact with the other two variables in Experiment 1.…”

“…Two weeks later, they completed an autobiographical memory specificity measure and they completed the LEI a second time. We included both positive and negative events in the imagination exercises because some studies have shown that imagination inflation is influenced by event valence (e.g., Bays, Zabrucky, & Foley, 2015; Sharman & Barnier, 2008). We examined the change in ratings for the imagined events relative to control events that were not imagined.…”

“…The introduction to the imagination exercises was adapted from Garry et al. (1996) and the instructions for the exercises were adapted from Bays et al. (2015).…”

Reduced impact of imagery processing on false autobiographical recollection: the effects of dynamic visual noise

“…For example, it has been found that imagination effects are typically greater in participants with higher visual imagery abilities (Horselenberg, Merckelbach, Muris, Rassin, Sijsenaar & Spaan, 2000;Johnson, Raye, Wang & Taylor 1979). In addition, imagery instructions that guide or prompt the use of sensory information, enhance imagination inflation effects (Bays, Zabrucky, & Foley, 2015), and can lead to detailed (but false) recollection and reduced source discriminability (Thomas, Bulevich, & Loftus, 2003). Finally, the visual perspective from which one imagines an event can also influence the magnitude of the inflation effect (Linder & Echterhoff, 2015;Marsh, et al, 2014).…”