ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
Perceived memory credibility: The role of details.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The detection of episodic memory in others biases social choice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The sharing of personal memories is a unique aspect of the human experience. Humans communicate to provide information, to influence, or even to amuse. How do we distinguish between credible and noncredible narratives? Forensic science has identified race, age, and detail quantity as influential. We do not know how the nature of narrated details impacts believability. We report two studies investigating how detail composition influences credibility ratings using definitions of details suggested by Levine et al. (2002). Internal details are directly connected to the episodic aspects of the memory, while external details refer to semantic facts or depictions not directly related to the main event. A total of 825 participants rated narratives that varied detail number and type for perceived credibility or saliency. Episodic memory details enhanced credibility more than semantic memory details. In addition, within episodic memories, person-related details enhanced credibility more than non-person-related details. Our results suggest a lens through which to view the credibility of what we hear and read.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.