True and false memories in adolescents with psychosis: Evidence for impaired recollection and familiarity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Psychotic patients are impaired on recall and recognition of studied items (true memory) and typically make more false recall (intrusions) and false recognition than controls, reflecting greater susceptibility to false memory. The functional mechanisms underlying these deficits are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to examine recollection and familiarity in true and false memory in psychotic adolescents without long-term exposure to medication and repeated hospitalisations. METHODS: Seventeen adolescents with psychosis and 17 matched controls were tested on a DRM false memory paradigm combined with a remember (R)/know (K)/guess (G) procedure. Recall and recognition of targets (studied words), critical lures (associated words) and unrelated distractors were measured. Between-group comparisons were made using t-tests and mixed ANOVAs. Independent estimates for recollection and familiarity were also calculated. RESULTS: True memory was impaired in patients. Similar rates of false memory for critical lures were found in both groups. False memory for unrelated distractors was increased in patients. Contrary to controls, who attributed more R and K responses to targets than lures, patients attributed similar proportions of R and K responses to targets and lures. Furthermore, patients attributed more K responses than controls to all distractors. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest a deficit in recollection- and familiarity-based memory in psychotic adolescents as well as reliance on preserved gist or meaning-based memory to support poor item-specific memory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it