Constructing Memories
2-3 Minute Read
Author: Robert J. McAuley, PhD
Purpose
Establish an understanding of the constructive nature and malleability of autobiographical memory recall so that students are better prepared when interviewing patients.
Learning Objectives
1. Discriminate between different types of memories.
2. Expunge the belief that memories are sacrosanct records of events.
3. Appreciate the ease of developing false memories.
Up to this point, this series has discussed how memories are collected. An equally interesting topic is how memories are retrieved. Cognitive Psychologists divide long-term memories into implicit and explicit memories.(1) Knowing how to tie a tie or ride a bike are implicit memories and are retrievable without conscious effort. Explicit memories are those memories that require intentional retrieval. Tulving further delineated explicit memories into semantic and episodic categories.(2) Semantic memories are the things I know, such as my wife’s birthdate. I can retrieve my wife’s birthdate from memory without retrieving how I learned it. Episodic memories are experiential and contain the circumstances surrounding an event. When I recall the first time I met my wife, the memory includes approximate time, date, location information, and how I felt when we first met. However, my memory of that happy event has not remained static. Instead, it has become a conglomeration of memories formed based on my first-hand experience and those I created from listening to my wife recounting her memories of the event. Thus, when I recall meeting my wife for the first time, I don’t retrieve an exact event record; instead, I construct a memory based on information from multiple sources. Bartlett called this reconstructive memory.(3)
The problem is that humans are not good at differentiating between memories acquired from being present at an event and those developed after the fact. We may incorporate the post-event facts into our memories by hearing someone else recall their memories of the event or through leading questions from an interviewer. As Loftus and Palmer have demonstrated, post facto information can implant memories of events that never occurred, and subjects could not differentiate between false memories from events that happened.(4) The ease of intentional or accidental implant of false memories is one of the reasons that police officers follow specific protocols when interviewing witnesses.(5) A recent review by Otgaar et al. argues that contrary to popular belief, children are less likely than adults to produce false memories.(6)
This research is especially relevant to healthcare professionals regarding the mutual reinforcement between false memories and unconscious bias. But that’s a discussion for another day.■
References
(1) Tari SK. Investigating memory development in children and infantile amnesia in adults. Published online 2008.
(2) Tulving E, Donaldson W, Bower GH, eds. Organization of Memory. Academic Press; 1972.
(3) Bartlett FC. Remembering. Cambridge University Press; 1932.
(4) Loftus EF, Palmer JC. Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. J Verbal Learning and Verbal Behav. Accessed September 6, 2023. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022537174800113?via%3Dihub
(5) Loftus EF. Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cogn Psychol. 1975;7(4):560-572. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90023-7
(6) Otgaar H, Howe ML, Muris P, Merckelbach H. Dealing With False Memories in Children and Adults: Recommendations for the Legal Arena. Policy Insights from the Behav and Brain Sciences. 2019;6(1):87-93. doi:10.1177/2372732218818584