Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Generative processing and false memories: when there is no cost.

Sal A Soraci1, Michael T Carlin, Michael P Toglia

  • 1Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155, USA. sal.soraci@tufts.edu

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
|August 20, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Perceptions of "Stealthing" in Civil Court.

Violence against women·2025
Same author

Distribution-free Bayesian analyses with the DFBA statistical package.

Behavior research methods·2025
Same author

Legal Decision-Making in an Adult Rape Case Involving DNA Evidence.

Violence against women·2024
Same author

The truth about snitches: an archival analysis of informant testimony.

Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law·2022
Same author

Reconsideration of the type I error rate for psychological science in the era of replication.

Psychological methods·2022
Same author

Novel Approaches and Cognitive Neuroscience Perspectives on False Memory and Deception.

Frontiers in psychology·2022
Same journal

Memory loves company: Related object pairs benefit working memory.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Ranschburg unrepeated.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times: Evidence for switch cost beyond stimulus-response tasks.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Testing the predictions of a distinctiveness model of memory: The production effect in backward recall.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

On the impact of adjacency on transposed-word effects under serial presentation.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

It's time to opt out: Metacognitive analysis of time regulation under uncertainty.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
See all related articles

Generating information can improve true memory recall but does not increase false memories, challenging the "more is less" effect in certain contexts. This research explores memory encoding and retrieval.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Memory Studies
  • Human Cognition

Background:

  • Encoding manipulations, like levels of processing, can enhance memory retention.
  • However, these manipulations often paradoxically increase false memories, a phenomenon known as the 'more is less' effect.
  • Generative processing, where individuals actively create or generate information, is explored as a factor influencing this effect.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of generative processing on false memory formation.
  • To determine if generative processing adheres to the 'more is less' effect observed with other encoding manipulations.
  • To differentiate the effects of generative processing in standard (Deese-Roediger-McDermott) and modified (cuing procedure) paradigms.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Experiments 1-3 utilized Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) word lists, comparing recognition and recall performance for items that were read versus generated.
  • Experiment 4 employed a cuing procedure, distinct from the DRM methodology, to examine false memories under congruous and incongruous generation conditions.
  • Both true and false memory measures were assessed across recognition and recall tasks.

    • Main Results:

    • In the DRM paradigm (Experiments 1-3), generative processing enhanced true memory performance without increasing false memories, demonstrating a 'generation at no cost' pattern.
    • In Experiment 4, the cuing procedure yielded a 'more is less' pattern for congruous generation.
    • Conversely, incongruous generation in Experiment 4 resulted in a 'no cost' pattern for false memories.

    Conclusions:

    • Generative processing, particularly in standard DRM lists, does not necessarily lead to increased false memories, contrasting with the typical 'more is less' effect.
    • The context of encoding, specifically the congruity and methodology (DRM vs. cuing), critically influences the relationship between generation and false memory formation.
    • A distinction exists between encoding contexts, impacting whether generative processing incurs a cost in terms of false memory proliferation.