Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37650821›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. General2023

False memories for ending of events.

Petar P Raykov, Dominika Varga, Chris M Bird

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Petar P RaykovSussex Neuroscience, School of Psychology, University of Sussex.ORCID 0000-0002-2124-2995
Dominika VargaSussex Neuroscience, School of Psychology, University of Sussex.
Chris M BirdSussex Neuroscience, School of Psychology, University of Sussex.ORCID 0000-0002-8183-5688
University of Sussex · GB

Funding

Economic and Social Research CouncilEuropean Research Council (ERC)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Memories are not perfect recordings of the past and can be subject to systematic biases. Memory distortions are often caused by our experience of what typically happens in a given situation. However, it is unclear whether memory for events is biased by the knowledge that events usually have a predictable structure (a beginning, middle, and an end). Using video clips of everyday situations, we tested how interrupting events at unexpected time points affects memory of how those events ended. In four free recall experiments (1, 2, 4, and 5), we found that interrupting clips just before a salient piece of action was completed, resulted in the false recall of details about how the clip might have ended. We refer to this as "event extension." On the other hand, interrupting clips just after one scene had ended and a new scene started, resulted in omissions of details about the true ending of the clip (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that these effects were present, albeit attenuated, when testing memory shortly after watching the video clips compared to a week later (Experiments 5a and 5b). The event extension effect was not present when memory was tested with a recognition paradigm (Experiment 3). Overall, we conclude that when people watch videos that violate their expectations of typical event structure, they show a bias to later recall the videos as if they had ended at a predictable event boundary, exhibiting event extension or the omission of details depending on where the original video was interrupted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

MemoryMental RecallHumansRecognition, Psychology

Identifiers

PMID37650821
PMCPMC10694998
OpenAlexW4386305297

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.