Article 2

Memory myths

Many of us subscribe to false beliefs about how our memories work,

sometimes with serious consequences. We debunk some common myths

By Christian Jarrett, author of The Rough Guide to Psychology

The Guardian, Saturday 14 January 2012

As a lifelong user of human memory, you probably feel you've got a good

idea of how it works, right? To test your understanding of memory, we

compare several commonplace conceptions with insights from psychology

...

Memory acts like a video recorder

In a US survey published in 2011, 63% of 1,838 respondents said they

believed "strongly" or "mostly" that memory works like a video camera,

"accurately recording events we see and hear so that we can review and

inspect them later". Memory is, in fact, a creative, fallible process, highly

prone to suggestion and other distorting influences.

Some people have photographic memories

An extension to the memory as video recorder myth is the idea that some

people have a "photographic memory"; that they can take a snap shot of a

scene or a page in a book, and then bring it to mind whenever they want to.

It's tempting to invoke such an ability to explain the achievements of

celebrated memory champions such as Lu Chao. In 2005, he set a new

world record (as recognised by the Guinness World Records) by reciting

the first 67,890 digits of pi entirely from memory. However, studies of

memory champions reveal that they depend on mnemonic devices and

thousands of hours of practice.

A related concept is eidetic imagery, in which a person claims to "see" a

detailed visual scene that is no longer visible. However, tests of

"eidetikers" find their memory of images to be no more accurate than

control participants. It seems they just feel as though the image is vivid and

still "out there" rather than in their heads.

Forgetting occurs gradually

Some memory misconceptions have serious consequences for the way eye-

(and ear-) witness testimony is treated in court. For example, many people,

including psychologists (according to a recent Norwegian survey), believe

that forgetting occurs gradually, as if memories decay like an ageing reel of

film. In fact, most forgetting occurs immediately after an event.

Confidence is a reliable indicator of memory accuracy

While it's true that accuracy and confidence can correlate within a single

person's repertoire of recollections, confidence is a poor marker of accuracy

when judging a single act of recollection or when comparing across

witnesses. One reason is that some factors, such as repeated questioning,

can boost confidence without increasing accuracy. Also, we all vary in our

baseline levels of memory confidence. So when judging a single witness,

we don't know if their confidence is high by their standards. In the legal

system, when convicted people are exonerated by DNA evidence, confident

testimony from an eye witness is the most common reason they were

originally found guilty.

A related myth is that emotional events lead to more ingrained, accurate

memories. Memories for dramatic events often feel more vivid and people

feel more confident in these memories, but, in fact, they are just as prone to

being forgotten as ordinary memories. Furthermore, if an event is stressful,

this is likely to interfere with remembering details of that event.

Traumatic memories can be repressed and "recovered" years after

they occurred

While subscribing to the erroneous idea that memories of emotive events

are highly accurate, many people also often hold the somewhat paradoxical

belief that traumatic memories, such as of abuse in childhood, are prone to

repression. A related belief is that such memories can be "recovered" later

in life, dug out with the help of a skilled therapist, or perhaps a hypnotist.

In fact, studies of child abuse victims suggest strongly that they usually do

not forget their experiences. Moreover, research has shown that memories

of abuse "recovered" in therapy are far less likely to be corroborated by

third parties, or other evidence, than abuse memories recalled later in life

outside of therapy, or never-forgotten abuse memories.

The consensus of the American Psychological Association on child abuse

memories says that "most people who were sexually abused as children

remember all or part of what happened to them, although they may not

fully understand or disclose it".

Hypnosis can be used to retrieve forgotten memories

Many people believe that hypnosis can be used to unearth not only past

traumas but all manner of long-forgotten memories, including recollections

way back to the womb or even to past lives.

In a way, it is a belief that is consistent with the "memory as a video

recorder" myth; the mistaken rationale being that because everything we

experience is stored, we just need to find a way to reach it. In fact, nearly

all the evidence suggests that hypnosis fails to aid recall, but instead has the

potentially harmful effect of increasing people's faith in their memories,

whether or not they are accurate recollections of events.

Amnesiacs forget who they are

A persistent myth is the idea that people suffering from amnesia have lost

their long-term memory, including any recollection of their identity. In fact,

amnesia caused by illness or brain damage typically manifests as an

inability to lay down new memories. Specifically what is broken is the

ability to convert short-term memories into long-term memories. An

amnesiac will usually be able to tell you who they are and share stories

about their earlier lives, but they won't be able to tell you what they had for

breakfast.