ArticleResearch square2026
Examining memory specificity and generalization contributions to false recall in DRM paradigm.
Article in Research square, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Why are some people more susceptible to false memory than others? Prior evidence indicates that false memories arise from a lack of specificity in memory representations. Additionally, false memory has been postulated to reflect a constructive generalization process that may be adaptive in nature. Here, we tested how individual differences in false memory relate to the ability to recall differentiating details (specificity) and the ability to integrate across related experiences (generalization) in a large sample of participants. False memory was assessed using the Deese, Roediger, and McDermott paradigm (DRM), where participants study lists of related words (e.g., sour, honey, tooth) and then often falsely recall non-presented critical lure (sweet). Participants completed the DRM paradigm along with multiple measures of memory specificity and generalization. Multiple regression revealed that higher memory specificity scores predicted greater true recall and lower false recall in DRM, supporting theories that emphasize the role of memory specificity in preventing false memories. In contrast, higher memory generalization predicted higher true recall but accounted for no unique variance in false recall when considering specificity. These findings inform current theories of false memory and indicate that false memories may stem from reduced representational specificity rather than adaptive abstraction.
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.