事件结束的虚假记忆。

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Experimental Psychology: General Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1037/xge0001462
Petar P Raykov, Dominika Varga, Chris M Bird
{"title":"事件结束的虚假记忆。","authors":"Petar P Raykov, Dominika Varga, Chris M Bird","doi":"10.1037/xge0001462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Memories are not perfect recordings of the past and can be subject to systematic biases. Memory distortions are often caused by our experience of what typically happens in a given situation. However, it is unclear whether memory for events is biased by the knowledge that events usually have a predictable structure (a beginning, middle, and an end). Using video clips of everyday situations, we tested how interrupting events at unexpected time points affects memory of how those events ended. In four free recall experiments (1, 2, 4, and 5), we found that interrupting clips just before a salient piece of action was completed, resulted in the false recall of details about how the clip might have ended. We refer to this as \"event extension.\" On the other hand, interrupting clips just after one scene had ended and a new scene started, resulted in omissions of details about the true ending of the clip (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that these effects were present, albeit attenuated, when testing memory shortly after watching the video clips compared to a week later (Experiments 5a and 5b). The event extension effect was not present when memory was tested with a recognition paradigm (Experiment 3). Overall, we conclude that when people watch videos that violate their expectations of typical event structure, they show a bias to later recall the videos as if they had ended at a predictable event boundary, exhibiting event extension or the omission of details depending on where the original video was interrupted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":"3459-3475"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694998/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"False memories for ending of events.\",\"authors\":\"Petar P Raykov, Dominika Varga, Chris M Bird\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xge0001462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Memories are not perfect recordings of the past and can be subject to systematic biases. Memory distortions are often caused by our experience of what typically happens in a given situation. However, it is unclear whether memory for events is biased by the knowledge that events usually have a predictable structure (a beginning, middle, and an end). Using video clips of everyday situations, we tested how interrupting events at unexpected time points affects memory of how those events ended. In four free recall experiments (1, 2, 4, and 5), we found that interrupting clips just before a salient piece of action was completed, resulted in the false recall of details about how the clip might have ended. We refer to this as \\\"event extension.\\\" On the other hand, interrupting clips just after one scene had ended and a new scene started, resulted in omissions of details about the true ending of the clip (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that these effects were present, albeit attenuated, when testing memory shortly after watching the video clips compared to a week later (Experiments 5a and 5b). The event extension effect was not present when memory was tested with a recognition paradigm (Experiment 3). Overall, we conclude that when people watch videos that violate their expectations of typical event structure, they show a bias to later recall the videos as if they had ended at a predictable event boundary, exhibiting event extension or the omission of details depending on where the original video was interrupted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"3459-3475\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694998/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001462\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001462","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

记忆并不是对过去的完美记录,可能会受到系统性偏见的影响。记忆扭曲通常是由我们对特定情况下通常发生的事情的经验引起的。然而,对于事件的记忆是否受到事件通常具有可预测结构(开始、中间和结束)这一知识的影响,目前尚不清楚。使用日常场景的视频片段,我们测试了在意想不到的时间点中断事件会如何影响人们对这些事件如何结束的记忆。在四个自由回忆实验(1、2、4和5)中,我们发现,在一个重要动作完成之前打断片段,会导致对片段可能如何结束的细节的错误回忆。我们将此称为“事件扩展”。另一方面,在一个场景结束和一个新场景开始后打断剪辑,导致剪辑真实结束的细节被遗漏(实验4和5)。我们发现,在观看视频剪辑后不久测试记忆时,与一周后相比,这些影响存在,尽管减弱了(实验5a和5b)。当用识别范式测试记忆时,事件延伸效应不存在(实验3)。总的来说,我们得出结论,当人们观看违背他们对典型事件结构的期望的视频时,他们表现出一种稍后回忆视频的倾向,就好像他们在一个可预测的事件边界结束一样,表现出事件延伸或细节的遗漏,这取决于原始视频被中断的位置。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
False memories for ending of events.

Memories are not perfect recordings of the past and can be subject to systematic biases. Memory distortions are often caused by our experience of what typically happens in a given situation. However, it is unclear whether memory for events is biased by the knowledge that events usually have a predictable structure (a beginning, middle, and an end). Using video clips of everyday situations, we tested how interrupting events at unexpected time points affects memory of how those events ended. In four free recall experiments (1, 2, 4, and 5), we found that interrupting clips just before a salient piece of action was completed, resulted in the false recall of details about how the clip might have ended. We refer to this as "event extension." On the other hand, interrupting clips just after one scene had ended and a new scene started, resulted in omissions of details about the true ending of the clip (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that these effects were present, albeit attenuated, when testing memory shortly after watching the video clips compared to a week later (Experiments 5a and 5b). The event extension effect was not present when memory was tested with a recognition paradigm (Experiment 3). Overall, we conclude that when people watch videos that violate their expectations of typical event structure, they show a bias to later recall the videos as if they had ended at a predictable event boundary, exhibiting event extension or the omission of details depending on where the original video was interrupted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
期刊最新文献
Bypassing versus correcting misinformation: Efficacy and fundamental processes. Risky hybrid foraging: The impact of risk, reward value, and prevalence on foraging behavior in hybrid visual search. Shortcuts to insincerity: Texting abbreviations seem insincere and not worth answering. Confidence regulates feedback processing during human probabilistic learning. Does affective processing require awareness? On the use of the Perceptual Awareness Scale in response priming research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1