Individual Differences in Disqualifying Monitoring Underlie False Recognition of Associative and Conjunction Lures

Mem Cognit. 2022 May;50(4):751-764. doi: 10.3758/s13421-021-01243-5. Epub 2021 Oct 28.

Abstract

The current study leveraged experimental and individual differences methodology to examine whether false memories across different list-learning tasks arise from a common cause. Participants completed multiple false memory (associative and conjunction lure), working memory (operation and reading span), and source monitoring (verbal and picture) tasks. Memory discriminability in the associative and conjunction tasks loaded onto a single (general) factor and were unaffected by warnings provided at encoding. Consistent with previous research, source-monitoring ability fully mediated the relation between working memory and false memories. Moreover, individuals with higher source monitoring-ability were better able to recall contextual information from encoding to correctly reject lures. These results suggest that there are stable individual differences in false remembering across tasks. The commonality across tasks may be due, at least in part, to the ability to effectively use disqualifying monitoring processes.

Keywords: False memory; Rejection strategies; Source monitoring; Working memory; individual differences.

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Individuality*
  • Memory, Short-Term
  • Mental Recall
  • Recognition, Psychology*