Lanely et al. - False Memories

Laney et al. - False Memories

​(2008)

CIE Psychology 9990 - AS - Cognitive Approach​

by Violet Bawab

​

​Background

​Memory is NOT always a factual recording of an event.

​It can become distorted by other information, both during encoding and after the event.

​

​Previous experiments have resulted in people believing that an impossible event has taken place:

​- Braun et al. (2002) - it is possible to implant memories of participants meeting Bugs Bunny at Disneyland. (Buggs Bunny is not a Disneyland character).

​Background

​Other studies:

​- Bernstein et al., 2005) has shown that false memories of sickness following eating of pickels or eggs changed participant willingness to each the foods when asked about food preferences.

​

​It is therefore important to consider:

​- Can implanting positive false memories about certain foods help some people make more healthy food choices (application)?

​

Multiple Choice

Braun et al. (2002) explored false memories and proved that

• Participants may be convinced that Bugs Bunny was seen at a Warner Brothers

• Participants may be convinced that Bugs Bunny was not seen at a Warner Brothers

• Participants may be convinced that Bugs Bunny was not seen at a Disney Land

• Participants may be convinced that Bugs Bunny was seen at a Disney Land

Multiple Choice

Bernstein et al. (2005) demonstrated

• that false memories about sickness related to eating foods are not possible

• That there are practical uses of implanting false memories about nutritious food items

• That false memories are possible

• That it is possible to implant false memories about eating pickles and eggs

​What did Laney et al. aim to explore?

• ​investigating the impact of implanting positive false beliefs and memories in people about their liking of eating asparagus as a child

• ​the effect of that memory on their food preference later

​Laney et al.

• ​expected to be able to implant memories of loving asparagus the first time it was tried (based on previous studies)

• ​Wanted to explore the possibility of these false memories leading to positive consequences for participants.

​Aims

​

1. ​To investigate whether positive false memories for loving asparagus can be implanted into people and then change their childhood memories of liking asparagus

2. ​To investigate the consequences of implanting positive false memories in terms of the effects it has on liking asparagus and choosing asparagus

​Questionnaires used in Laney et al.

1) Food History Inventory (FHI)

​

​24 items, rated on a scale from 1 - 8

• ​1 - definitely did not happen

• ​8 - definitely did happen

​related to their food experiences before the age of 10

(Eg: loved asparagus the first time you tried it)

​Questionnaires used in Laney et al.

2) Restaurant Questionnaire (RQ)

​

​Assessed participant desire to eat each of the 32 separate dishes

​designed to look like a menu with five 'courses'

​respondents asked to imagine they were out for a special dinner and to rate (regardless of price), how likely they would be to order each food

​Scale from 1-8

​1 - definitely no

​8 - definitely yes

​Questionnaires used in Laney et al.

3) Food Preference Questionnaire (FPQ)

​62 item inventory of items of food (eg: Asparagus)

​Respondents asked to rate on a scale from 1-8

​1 - definitely not don't like to each for whatever reason

​8 - definitely like to each

​

​Questionnaires used in Laney et al.

4) Food Cost Questionnaire (FCQ)

21 food items (eg: a pound of asparagus) with multiple choice answers , responsdents had to circle the price they would be willing to pay for each

​

​Options included:

​Would never buy

​For asparagus, the price options were $1.9, $2.5, $3.2, $3.8, $4.4, $5.0 and $5.7

​Questionnaires used in Laney et al.

5) Memory or Belief (MBQ)

Respondents asked to indicate whether they had a memory of any experience with three items form the FHI, including for the 'love' condition, the critical item of asparagus.

​

​The choices were that they had a specific memory of the event occurring, a belief that the event had occurred (but lacked specific memory), or were positive that the event had not occurred.

​Laney et al.'s experiments

​2 experiments

​

​1) To see if false feedback about a liking of a food could cause a false memory and change participant's eating behavior

​

2) Checking the reliability of the first experiment's findings, and examine the underlying cognitive mechanisms of the false memory consequence effect.

​Experiment 1

Aim

• To investigate whether giving false feedback suggesting that a participant had loved to eat asparagus as a child, would generate a false belief or memory or experiences linked to eating and enjoying asparagus.

​Experiment 1

Research method:

​

• ​Lab experiment

• ​Some details (RQ) were made to resemble reality and reduce demand characteristics

​Experiment 1

Design

​

• ​Independent measures / groups design

• ​every participant was a part of one of two experimental conditions (love or control group)

Experiment 1 - Variables

• ​IV - whether a participant had the false belief that they had enjoyed asparagus as a child embedded during the second part of the experiment.

• ​Control group - no false belief

​

• ​DV - measured through the use of questionnaires (ratings on critical items on questionnaires

​Experiment 1 - Sample

​Independent measures design

• ​128 participants

• ​undergraduate students at the University of California

• ​received course credit for participation - volunteer from a pool of students

• 99 females and 29 males

• mean age 20.8

• Participants randomly assigned either 'love' condition (63) or control group (65)

Multiple Choice

The study was a

• Matched Pairs Design

• Independent measures design

• Repeated measures design

Multiple Choice

The IV was the

• Measured through beliefs or memory

• Ratings given by participants on the FHI and RQ

• The false belief condition

• The love asparagus condition

​Experiment 1 - Procedure

• ​Participants arrived at the laboratory in groups of up to 8

• ​They were told they were going to participant in a study of 'food preferences and personality'

• ​Deception was necessary to limit demand characteristics

​​Experiment 1 - Procedure

​First Session - Week 1 (all participants treated identically)

• ​Participants completed the FHI and RQ

• ​Participants also filled out 3 other questionnaires to distract them from true aim of study (including a personality measure, a social desirability scale, and an eating habits questionnaire).

​

​

​​Experiment 1 - Procedure

​Second Session - Week 2

• ​Participants invited back to laboratory

• ​They were randomly allocated into one of the two conditions (love asparagus or control)

• ​All participants were told that their responses form the first week hand been processed by a computer which had generated a 'personal' profile of their early childhood experiences with food.

• ​The report included:

  "as a young child, you disliked spinach, you enjoyed fried foods, and you felt happy when a classmate brought sweets to school"

​​Experiment 1 - Procedure

​Second Session - Week 2

• ​For the love group, the critical item

“you loved to eat cooked asparagus” was added in the 3rd position.

• ​To ensure that the participants processed the feedback, they all responded to brief questions about the “sweets at school” item, and the Love group also answered these about the critical item “asparagus”

• ​They were asked to “Imagine the setting. Where were you? Who was with you?” They then rated on a scale of 1 = not at all to 9 = very much, how much the experience had affected their adult personality

​​Experiment 1 - Procedure

​Second Session - Week 2

• They were asked to “Imagine the setting. Where were you? Who was with you?” They then rated on a scale of 1 = not at all to 9 = very much, how much the experience had affected their adult personality

• ​They additionally completed 2 new questionnaires: The Food Preferences Questionnaire (FPQ) and the Food Costs Questionnaire (FCQ).

• ​Participants additionally had to complete the Memory or Belief Questionnaire (M/B)

• ​Participants were fully debriefed and excused.

Multiple Choice

Which questionnaires did participants fill out during the two weeks?

• MB!

• FHI and FPQ

• FHI and RQ

• RQ and FCQ

​Experiment 1 - Results

• ​FHI: The results of 31 participants` were excluded as they liked asparagus before manipulation.

• Mean ratings of love group increased by 2.6 points and in the control group by 0.2 points.

​​Experiment 1 - Results

​Experiment 1 - Results

• M/B:

• In love group,

  • 22% reported a memory,

  • 35% reported a belief and

  • 43% were certain that the event had not occurred.

• ​In control group,

  • 12% reported a memory,

  • 28% reported a belief and

  • 61% were certain that the event had not occurred

Memories in Laney et al. ​

Defined as the ability to recall specific structured events with some details; the participant 'remembers' an experience.

​

​Beliefs are less detailed and not tied to a specific time or place; the participant 'knows' it happened but cannot go into specific detail.

​Believers VS non-believers

​To be labelled as a believer, a participant needed to meet the following criteria:

1. ​give a low rating on the FHI when initially asked if they loved asparagus (week 1)

2. ​increased their rating on the FHI when asked if they loved asparagus on week 2

3. ​given positive 'memory' or 'belief' response in MBQ

​Those who were told they loved asparagus when they first tried it had a greater chance of generating a false memory or belief to substantiate this false memory.

​Experiment 1 - Results

• Believers versus non-believers:

  • Believers were the participants who were susceptible to manipulation, while non-believers were those who weren’t.

  • 48% of participants were labelled as believers.

​

• FHI rating increased on an average of 4.5 points for believers and 0.9 points for non-believers.

• Memory increased on an average by 5.5 and belief by 3.6 points for the FHI.

​Experiment 1 - Results

• On the RQ believers reported more desire to eat asparagus at session 2 than the control group. Believers rated asparagus more favourably than controls, and their ratings increased from pre- to post-manipulation, while those of controls did not.

• ​On the FPQ believers reported liking asparagus significantly more than the control group and were willing to pay more for asparagus.

• Believers were additionally willing to pay more for asparagus than the control group.

​Experiment 1 - Conclusion

Subjects can be led to develop positively-framed false beliefs about experiences with foods, and these beliefs can lead to an increased liking of those foods.

The love group believers had a greater intention to eat asparagus in the future, they had a greater preference and were willing to pay more for asparagus.

​Experiment 2 - Aim

​o To replicate and extend the findings of Experiment 1.

​

o To examine possible underlying mechanisms of false memories by looking at whether the sight of asparagus is more appealing to people after the false manipulation about asparagus.

​Experiment 2 - Research Method

o Research Method: Laboratory experiment and Questionnaires

​

o Experimental Design: Independent Measures Design

​

​Experiment 2 - Variables

• ​IV - False belief condition (Love asparagus VS control) - Same as experiment 1

​

• ​DV - measured through the use of 4 questionnaires and participant feedback to a slideshow of 20 pictures of common foods

​Experiment 2 - Sample

• ​103 participants

• ​students at the University of Washington - receiving course credit for participation

• ​64 females and 39 males (mean age 19.9 years)

• ​Randomly assigned to love condition (58) and control group (45)

​Experiment 2 - Procedure

• At Session 1, when the participants arrived, they were told that their data would be entered into a computer system that would generate a profile based on their answers. No cover story was given.

​

• Participants completed the FHI, FPQ and RQ. To disguise the true aim of the study, they also completed two filler questionnaires - a personality measure and Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale.​

​​Experiment 2 - Procedure

• ​One week later at Session 2, participants returned and received false feedback about their responses from Session 1.

  This was identical to that given in Experiment 1. The critical item was “You loved asparagus the first time you ate it”, again embedded in the third position.

  Love group participants completed an elaboration exercise. They had to answer a set of questions about their memory for this event.

​​​Experiment 2 - Procedure

• ​If they appeared to struggle they were asked to imagine what might have happened. They were also asked their age, location, what they were doing at that time and how it made them feel.

​

• All participants produced qualitative data to the question “What is the most important childhood, food related event in your life that your profile did not report?”

​Experiment 2 - Procedure

​Participants then looked at 20 slides of common food including the critical item.

o Each slide was shown for 30 seconds and was rated on 4 criteria:

1. how appetizing they found the picture

2. how disgusting they fount the picture

3. whether the photograph was taken by a novice, amateur or professional

4. the artistic quality of the picture

​o Points 1, 2 and 4 were rated on a scale of 1 = not at all to 8 = very much

o Participants then completed FPQ, RQ and FHI again and the M/B questionnaire.

o They were then fully debriefed and excused.

Experiment 2 - Results

• As in experiment 1, 'love' and 'control' condition rating their liking of asparagus similarly before the manipulation.

• Their ratings differed after the manipulation - receiving their profile distorting their memory.

• This difference was statistically significant.

Experiment 2 - Results

​30 participants who were sure - during week 1 - that they loved asparagus the first time they tried it - had their results excluded from analysis (rating 5+ on the FHI)

Experiment 2 - Results- Memory or belief

• As in experiment 1, 'love' condition participants results from the MBQ suggested that they had a greater chance of generating a false memory or belief to substantiate the false memory they received in their report. HOWEVER, the difference between the two conditions was NOT statistically singnificant.

Experiment 2 - Results- Memory or belief

Experiment 2 - Results - Believers VS non-believers

• Believers were then compared to participants in the control group.

• On the RQ, neither believers nor control condition participants reported an increased desire for asparagus in wk2 compared to wk 1

• Participants were separated into believers and non-believers based on the same criteria as in the first experiment.

• 40 participants in the 'love' condition met the criteria to be labelled as believers.

Experiment 2 - Results - Believers VS non-believers

• On the photograph ratings, believers rated the asparagus photo as more apetizing than those in the control group (5.10 VS 4.00), and less disgusting (1.81 VS 3.24)

• On the FPQ - compared to the control group, believers reported a significantly greater desire to eat asparagus.

Conclusion - Experiment 2

- Participants could be given positive false food beliefs , and these beliefs.

• Those participants who believed the false feedback were more likely than those in the control group to rate a photograph of asparagus as more appetizing and less disgusting.

Conclusion - Experiment 2

- The photograph measure has supported an understanding of the cognitive mechanisms linked to false memories since the false memories primed participants to process the images of asparagus more positively.

• This positive response is interpreted as familiarity and the participant MISATTRITRIBUTED it to childhood experiences. leading to adult preference.

General Conclusion

It is clear that participants could have false beliefs implanted about whether they had previously had a specific positive experience with asparagus, and this belief has consequences on the attitudes of participants towards that food, as well as more memories.