ArticleBehavior research methods2025
How gist and association affect false memory: False recognition and gist rating norms.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are Creative People More Susceptible to False Memory? Evidence for Age- and Task-Related Differences.Creativity research journal · 2026Article
- Exploring the neural underpinnings of semantic and perceptual false memory formation.Neuropsychologia · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) illusion is one of the most widely used methods for studying false memory. Early studies provided normed false recall and false recognition data for DRM lists, where recognition is preceded by prior recall tests, and reported regression analyses that revealed backward associative strength (BAS) as one of the strongest predictors of false memory. As an extension of that line of research, we collected new recognition norms that are not confounded by prior recall tests and included gist strength (GS) as a theory-driven predictor of false memory. In Study 1, we normed true and false recognition for 55 DRM lists without prior recall tests, and in Study 2, we normed these lists for their perceived levels of gist strength. In Study 3, we fit a series of multiple linear regression models to the recognition data from Study 1 as well as recall and recognition data from prior false memory norms to disentangle the effects of BAS and GS on false recognition (with and without prior recall) and immediate false recall. Our results revealed that levels of true recognition and the recall-recognition correlation were inflated by prior recall tests. More importantly, GS was the strongest predictor of false recognition, whereas BAS was the strongest predictor of immediate false recall. A GS × BAS interaction was consistently observed for false recall and false recognition, in which the effects of BAS declined as GS increased. This suggests that the two variables compete with each other rather than reinforce each other's effects.
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.