When true memory availability promotes false memory: evidence from confabulating patients.
We explored the extent to which confabulators are susceptible to false recall and false recognition, and whether false recognition is reduced when memory for studied items is experimentally enhanced. Five confabulating patients, nine non-confabulating amnesics--including patients with (F amnesics) and without frontal-lobe dysfunction (NF amnesics)--and 14 control subjects underwent the DRM paradigm [Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 21, 803-814.] in two experimental conditions. In both conditions participants studied eight lists of semantic associates, and free recall was tested after the presentation of each list. In the Standard condition recognition was tested after the presentation of all the lists, whereas in the Proximal condition patients were administered a six-item recognition task after the presentation of each list. Participants also provided remember or know judgements, and described the content of their recollections. All groups of patients recalled a lower proportion of targets and critical lures than did control subjects, but confabulators recalled more words unrelated to the studied lists than did NF amnesics and controls. All groups of participants improved true recognition across conditions. However, whereas normal controls suppressed false recognition to critical lures in the Proximal compared to the Standard condition, and non-confabulating amnesics showed comparable gist-based false recognition, confabulators showed increased levels of false recognition to critical lures across conditions. Furthermore, NF amnesics significantly reduced false recognition to unrelated lures in the Proximal compared to the Standard condition, whereas confabulators were unable to suppress false recognition to unrelated lures across conditions. Analysis of the phenomenological experience showed that, unlike non-confabulating amnesics, confabulators characterized true and false memories with irrelevant information related to test items. Results are interpreted in light of confabulators' monitoring deficits.
Ciaramelli
Elisa
E
Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. ciaramelli@psice.unibo.it
Ghetti
Simona
S
Frattarelli
Massimo
M
Làdavas
Elisabetta
E
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001931:Brain Mapping; D003704:Dementia / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology*; D005260:Female; D005625:Frontal Lobe / Q000503:physiopathology; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods; D008297:Male; D008569:Memory Disorders / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010153:Paired-Associate Learning; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*; D012094:Repression, Psychology; D014936:Word Association Tests