Category: Memory

Some of the most widespread beliefs about memory are myths and misconceptions.

One of the classic criticisms levelled at psychology is that it’s just common sense.

And there’s nothing that winds up psychologists more than having this old saw repeated back to them.

If it’s true we should be able to ask the general public six easy questions about the psychology of, let’s say, memory, and they should do pretty well.

After all, everyone has a mind of their own and can introspect and see what’s going on inside it, so they should be able to answer these questions easily, shouldn’t they?

Myths about memory

Simons and Chabris (2011) had 1,838 Americans polled with six basic statements, testing some common myths about memory.

Great care was taken to try and get a representative sample of the general population.

Their responses were compared with those of almost 100 psychologists.

Amongst these were 16 professors with at least 10 years experience in researching memory.

The statements are all below in their original form:

1. “People suffering from amnesia typically cannot recall their own name or identity.”

Fully 83 percent of people agreed either ‘mostly’ or ‘strongly’ with this statement.

In contrast, all the experts disagreed ‘mostly’ or ‘strongly’ with this statement.

In fact, people suffering from amnesia normally can remember their own name and identity, so it is a myth about memory.

The reason people get this so wrong is probably because they are often exposed to incredibly inaccurate depictions of amnesia.

Films like ‘The Bourne Identity’ (and every sitcom ever made that uses an amnesia plot) are partly to blame; while films like ‘Memento’, with its much more accurate depiction of amnesia, are in the minority.

2. “In my opinion, the testimony of one confident eyewitness should be enough evidence to convict a defendant of a crime.”

37 percent of the public agreed, while all 16 experts disagreed.

Actually eyewitness testimony can be frighteningly inaccurate, so it is another of the myths about memory.

One of the problems with memory is that people are surprisingly suggestible.

Even relatively small differences in the way eyewitnesses are handled can have a huge impact on what they claim to have seen.

For a good example have a look at this article on suggestibility.

3. “Human memory works like a video camera, accurately recording the events we see and hear so that we can review and inspect them later.”

63 percent of the public agreed, while all 16 experts disagreed.

This is a surprisingly high percentage given how most people frequently have problems recalling basic facts.

In fact, it is one of the myths about memory, since it works nothing like a video camera.

In reality, what we recall is affected by our current emotional state, our motivations and so on.

And, of course, a lot of the time we can’t remember it at all.

See this article on the short-term memory vs. long-term memory.

4. “Hypnosis is useful in helping witnesses accurately recall details of crimes.”

55 percent of the public agreed, while 14 experts disagreed and 2 didn’t know or thought it was unclear.

Hypnosis is a bit more controversial, but still the public had a lot more faith in it than the psychologists.

Part of the problem with hypnosis is that it can make people incredibly suggestible to completely false information.

Through hypnosis, eyewitnesses can come to believe things that never happened.

One great example is the ‘lost in the mall‘ study.

5. “People generally notice when something unexpected enters their field of view, even when they’re paying attention to something else.”

78 percent of the public agreed and 13 experts disagreed, while 3 agreed.

This one was the most controversial for the experts, but probably because there’s little evidence about how often we fail to notice when something unexpected comes into view.

The general point here is that people are much more absent-minded than they think.

That’s because of the paradox that we don’t notice what we don’t notice.

For all the classic examples check out this article on absent-mindedness.

6. “Once you have experienced an event and formed a memory of it, that memory does not change.”

48 percent of the public agreed while 15 experts disagreed and one thought it was unclear.

This is yet another myth about memory.

Actually even so-called ‘flashbulb memories’—like where you were when Kennedy was shot—can be quite inaccurate or easily change over time.

For a great example of how malleable memories are, check out this previous article on misattribution, how memories are distorted and invented.

Not common sense

By and large, then, according to memory experts, all these statements are false — they are all myths about memory.

So, should anyone say to you: “psychology is just common sense”, try asking them if they agree with a couple of the above six statements.

If they do, your work is done.

You’ll have spotted that the context for these questions is often related to eyewitness testimony.

That’s because in court, lay beliefs about memory are so important. Simons and Chabris conclude by saying:

“The prevalence of mistaken beliefs in the general public implies that similar misunderstandings likely are common among jurors and could well lead to flawed analyses of testimony that involves memory. At least for these basic properties of memory, commonsense intuitions are more likely to be wrong than right.”

Try not to think about what kind of effect these mistaken models of how memory works have on our legal system and public life in general or you’re likely to become mighty depressed.

→ Continue reading: Facts About Memory: 10 Interesting Things You Should Know

Learning to play music can have a powerful effect on long-term memory and overall brain function.

Professional musicians show superior long-term memory compared with non-musicians, research shows.

Their brains are also capable of much faster neural responses in key areas of the brain related to decision-making, memory and attention.

The results were presented at the Society for Neuroscience annual meeting in Washington, DC (Schaeffer et al., 2014).

Dr Heekyeong Park, who led the study, said:

“Musically trained people are known to process linguistic materials a split second faster than those without training, and previous research also has shown musicians have advantages in working memory.

What we wanted to know is whether there are differences between pictorial and verbal tasks and whether any advantages extend to long-term memory.

If proven, those advantages could represent an intervention option to explore for people with cognitive challenges.”

Music and memory study

The 14 professional musicians in the study — all of whom had been playing for 15 years — were given a series of pictures and words to remember.

Their results on a long-term memory test were compared with a group of 15 non-musicians.

While they did the test, their neural responses were measured using electroencephalography (EEG) technology.

The musicians had the advantage in long-term memory for the pictures, although not the verbal items.

Measures of the musicians’ brain function also showed that their neural response was faster than non-musicians.

Areas in the mid-frontal region — those associated with decision-making — were between one-third and half-a-second faster.

In the parietal lobes — which are associated with the senses, memory and attention — their neural response were sometimes almost one second faster than non-musicians.

It’s not yet known why these advantages in processing and memory occur, but Dr. Park speculates that learning to navigate musical scores may be partly responsible.

This study adds to a growing body of evidence showing that musical training has a wonderful positive effect on cognitive abilities.

.

Scientists have found that phenolic compounds in this drink can help improve spatial memory.

One to three glasses of champagne each week could slow memory loss from ageing, research finds.

Scientists have found that phenolic compounds in champagne can help improve spatial memory.

The phenolic compounds come from the Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier red grapes which are used alongside Chardonnay in the production of champagne.

The compounds affect the signals sent from the hippocampus to the cortex.

The compounds were found to slow the age-related decline in this signalling.

Professor Jeremy Spencer, an expert on phytochemicals and brain function, said:

“These exciting results illustrate for the first time that the moderate consumption of champagne has the potential to influence cognitive functioning, such as memory.

Such observations have previously been reported with red wine, through the actions of flavonoids contained within it.

However, our research shows that champagne, which lacks flavonoids, is also capable of influencing brain function through the actions of smaller phenolic compounds, previously thought to lack biological activity.

We encourage a responsible approach to alcohol consumption, and our results suggest that a very low intake of one to two glasses a week can be effective.”

The research was carried out on rodents, but Dr David Vauzour, one of the study’s authors, said:

“In the near future we will be looking to translate these findings into humans.

This has been achieved successfully with other polyphenol-rich foods, such as blueberry and cocoa, and we predict similar outcomes for moderate champagne intake on cognition in humans.”

The study was published in the journal Antioxidants and Redox Signalling (Corona et al., 2013)