MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4415681888 · doi:10.63544/ijss.v4i4.188

Effects of Contextual Cues on False Memory: A Comparative Experimental Approach

2025· article· W4415681888 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sovaiba, Ather Mujitaba, Ayla Ihsan

Notice bibliographique

RevueInverge Journal of Social Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Langue
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueMemory Processes and Influences
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRecallFalse memorySensory cueIntrusionControl (management)Analysis of varianceMixed-design analysis of varianceWord (group theory)Cue-dependent forgetting

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Research on false memory formation using the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm has been extensively conducted in Western contexts. Yet, a significant gap remains in experimental investigations within South Asian populations, particularly in Pakistan. Existing studies, such as those on the Visual Mandela Effect, have explored collective false memories; however, they lack controlled experimental manipulation of contextual variables. To address this gap, the study examined the impact of contextual cues, both visual and auditory, and the effect of no contextual cues, on false memory formation. Sixty participants (aged 18–40) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Visual and Auditory Cues, Visual Cues only, and Word List only. Each group was presented with three semantically themed DRM word lists across three recall blocks. A between-subjects one-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in the recall of critical lures across groups, with the highest false memory incidence observed in the combined cue condition, [F (2,57) = 14.505, p < .001, η² = .337]. Post hoc analyses further confirmed that exposure to multimodal cues significantly increased susceptibility to false memories compared to the control condition. However, a repeated-measures of ANOVA indicated no significant change in critical lure recall across the three blocks within groups. Additionally, the control group demonstrated higher accurate recall and lower intrusion rates. These findings underscore the role of sensory contextual cues in modulating memory distortion and contribute novel cross-cultural evidence to the literature on memory and cognition. The study holds implications for legal, clinical, and educational settings where memory accuracy is critical. References Ahmed, W., Imtiaz, K., Muzammil, M., & Khan, S. M. (2025). Leadership Outcomes through the Lens of Workplace Spirituality and Character Development. Inverge Journal of Social Sciences, 4(4), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.63544/ijss.v4i4.176 Akdoğan, M., Akırmak, Ü., & Gürsoy, İ. (2021). Summary an examination of the false memory rates of Turkish words with the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. Alakbarova, D., Hicks, J. L., & Ball, B. H. (2021). The influence of semantic context on false memories. Memory & Cognition, 49(8), 1555–1567. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01182-1 Anglada-Tort, M., Baker, T., & Müllensiefen, D. (2018). False memories in music listening: Exploring the misinformation effect and individual difference factors in auditory memory. Memory, 27(5), 612–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2018.1545858 Arndt, J. (2010). The role of memory activation in creating false memories of encoding context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017394 Atilgan, H., Town, S. M., Wood, K. C., Jones, G. P., Maddox, R. K., Lee, A. K. C., & Bizley, J. K. (2018). Integration of visual information in auditory cortex promotes auditory scene analysis through multisensory binding. Neuron, 97(3), 640–655.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.12.034 Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2 Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (Eds.). (2005). The science of false memory. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195154054.001.0001 Brainerd, C. J., Reyna, V. F., & Ceci, S. J. (2008). Developmental reversals in false memory: A review of data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3), 343–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.343 Brockmole, J. R., Castelhano, M. S., & Henderson, J. M. (2006). Contextual cueing in naturalistic scenes: Global and local contexts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(4), 699–706. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.4.699 Burgess, N., & Hitch, G. (2005). Computational models of working memory: Putting long-term memory into context. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(11), 535–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.09.011 Cabeza, R., Rao, S. M., Wagner, A. D., Mayer, A. R., & Schacter, D. L. (2001). Can medial temporal lobe regions distinguish true from false? An event-related functional MRI study of veridical and illusory recognition memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(8), 4805–4810. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.081082698 Campbell, J. M., Edwards, M. S., Horswill, M. S., & Helman, S. (2007). Effects of contextual cues in recall and recognition memory: The misinformation effect reconsidered. British Journal of Psychology, 98(3), 485–498. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712606x160768 Chen, J. C., Li, W., Westerberg, C. E., & Tzeng, O. J. (2008). Test-item sequence affects false memory formation: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 431(1), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2007.11.020 Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998a). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36(1), 28–71. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0681 Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998b). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36(1), 28–71. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0681 Craik, F. I. M., & Schloerscheidt, A. M. (2011). Age-related differences in recognition memory: Effects of materials and context change. Psychology and Aging, 26(3), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022203 Deese, J. (1959). On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046671 Faizan, M., Yousaf, A., & Khan, S. M. (2025). Psychological Contract Breach and Its Consequences on Employee Turnover Intentions, Job Satisfaction, and Organizational Commitment: Insights from Human Resource Management and Workplace Psychology. Inverge Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.63544/ijss.v4i3.164 Gallo, D. A. (2010). False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion. Memory & Cognition, 38(7), 833–848. https://doi.org/10.3758/mc.38.7.833 Gallo, D. A., McDermott, K. B., Percer, J. M., & Roediger, H. L. (2001). Modality effects in false recall and false recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(2), 339–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.339 Gisquet-Verrier, P., & Riccio, D. C. (2018). Memory integration: An alternative to the consolidation/reconsolidation hypothesis. Progress in Neurobiology, 171, 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2018.10.002 Hina, B., Agha, N., & Rashdi, S. M. F. (2025). Gendered Barriers: How Patriarchal Norms Shape Married Women’s Employment in Sukkur City. Inverge Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 311–318. https://doi.org/10.63544/ijss.v4i3.169 Hockley, W. E., Bancroft, T. D., & Bryant, E. (2012). Associative and familiarity-based effects of environmental context on memory. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 66(2), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027136 Howe, M. L. (2011). The adaptive nature of memory and its illusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 312–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411416571 Jiang, Y. V., & Sisk, C. A. (2019). Contextual cueing. Neuromethods, 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/7657_2019_19 Kansteiner, W. (2002). Finding meaning in memory: A methodological critique of collective memory studies. History and Theory, 41(2), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/0018-2656.00198 Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Presentation modality and mode of recall in verbal false memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(4), 913–919. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.4.913 Kurkela, K. A., & Dennis, N. A. (2016). Event-related fMRI studies of false memory: An activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia, 81, 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.12.006 Lindsay, D. S., Hagen, L., Read, J. D., Wade, K. A., & Garry, M. (2004). True photographs and false memories. Psychological Science, 15(3), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503002.x Loftus, E. F. (2005). Planting misinformation in the human mind: A 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learning & Memory, 12(4), 361–366. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.94705 Loftus, E. F., & Pickrell, J. E. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25(12), 720–725. https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19951201-07 Lopes, E. J., & Garcia, R. B. (2014). On the possibility of using reaction time to study false memories. Psychology & Neuroscience, 7(3), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.3922/j.psns.2014.047 Loprinzi, P. D. (2023). Effects of pictorial and imagery encoding on false memories. Malmberg, K. J., Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2019). 50 years of research sparked by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968). Memory & Cognition, 47(4), 561–574. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00896-7 Marian, V., Hayakawa, S., & Schroeder, S. R. (2021). Cross-modal interaction between auditory and visual input impacts memory retrieval. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 15, Article 661477. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.661477 McDermott, K. B. (1996). The persistence of false memories in list recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 35(2), 212–230. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0012 Meyerhoff, H. S., Jaggy, O., Papenmeier, F., & Huff, M. (2022). Long-term memory representations for audio-visual scenes. Memory & Cognition, 51. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-022-01355-6 Neuschatz, J. S., Wetmore, S. A., & Gronlund, S. D. (2015). Memory gaps and memory errors. In Emerging trends in the social and

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,140
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,005
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,078
Tête enseignante GPT0,372
Écart entre enseignants0,295 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInverge Journal of Social SciencesMême sujetMemory Processes and InfluencesTravaux en français237 207