Individual Differences in Disqualifying Monitoring Underlie False Recognition of Associative and Conjunction Lures

B. Hunter Ball, Matthew K. Robison, Allison Coulson, Gene A. Brewer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The current study leveraged experimental and individual differences methodology to examine whether false memories across different list-learning tasks arise from a common cause. Participants completed multiple false memory (associative and conjunction lure), working memory (operation and reading span), and source monitoring (verbal and picture) tasks. Memory discriminability in the associative and conjunction tasks loaded onto a single (general) factor and were unaffected by warnings provided at encoding. Consistent with previous research, source-monitoring ability fully mediated the relation between working memory and false memories. Moreover, individuals with higher source monitoring-ability were better able to recall contextual information from encoding to correctly reject lures. These results suggest that there are stable individual differences in false remembering across tasks. The commonality across tasks may be due, at least in part, to the ability to effectively use disqualifying monitoring processes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalMemory and Cognition
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2021

Keywords

  • False memory
  • individual differences
  • Rejection strategies
  • Source monitoring
  • Working memory

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Individual Differences in Disqualifying Monitoring Underlie False Recognition of Associative and Conjunction Lures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this