The Physiology of False Memories

The Physiology of False Memories

Memories are an extraodinarily complex working of the human mind which enable us to recall events from our past histories, as if they occurred yesturday. However, memories are extreamly fragile things and are easily moulded into new creaitons. Our memories are not as accurate as we like to think they are.  Instead the process consists of reconstructing various fragments of the experience together like a puzzle, as memories are unable to be recreated as a whole. As a result some of the memories we recall are not 100% accurate as error seeps into the construction process, just like when we construct  a puzzle we might not necessarily get all the pieces in the correct place first time round. But in most cases our memories are accurate enough to be reliable. However, there are many accounts of false memories, and Loftus (1995) has shown that these can easily be implanted through things in the environment. An  abundance of research shows how false memories can be easily created by using manipulated photographs. Psychologists have been able to create some horrible memories of abuse as well as some more pleasant memories of birthday parties which never occured (Loftus, 1995). Some researchers have suggested that it is this technique of false memories that is responsible for people thinking they’ve been abducted by aliens (Loftus) However, as of yet there is no research which identifies whether memories can be true or false on a physiological level according to Costandi (guardian article writer).

Baioui, Ambach, Walter and Vaitl (2012) aimed to investigate the physiology of false memories using visual stimuli. In order to see whether there was a physiological difference in peoples’ recollection of fasle meories vs. true memories. The study involved 60 participants who, first had to learn a list of 12 semantically related words; bed, sheet, quilt, pillow. Afterwards they were given another list of words , some where the same and some were lures – things which could be associated with the previous list like – dream/ sleep. Participants’ where then asked to recall as many of the words on the original list as they could. Participants’ were often wrong on many acounts. During the experimnet participants where hooked-up to various things to measure skin conductance, heart rate, breathing and pulse in the finger.

This is one of the first studies to use physiological measures in investigating false memories. The findings suggests that basic involuntary responses means that researchers were able to distinguish between false and true memories. As with any type of scientific research there are implucations regarding the results. This study in particular rasies issues to do with witness tesitmony in court room situations. These physiological findings suppot Loftus and Palmer’s findings regarding inducing subtle difference eye-witness testimony regarding the true account of events and false memories through leading questions.

 

 

Interesting Reads

The physiological markers of false memories

Baioui, Ambach, Walter and Vaitl (2012)

Loftus

“Sometimes I believe more than six impossible things before breakfast…”

Myths about the brain are all over the place, engrained in folk law and become part of our everyday knowledge. This blog post hopes to separate the fact from the fiction, by looking at the evidence or lack of evidence in the world of psychology and neuroscience. For some reason when it comes to the brain there seems to be more myths than facts circulating our knowledge base. Maybe, this is because these appeal to us more, so we interpret them as truth.  Ever heard this … If you breathe through your left nostril it makes you more creative as the oxygen goes straight to the right hemisphere…. Really? Does the fact that when you breathe in the oxygen goes straight into the lungs count for anything? Titbits like this are part of a multi-million dollar business which provides us with non-effective ways of trying to improve cognitive functions. For some reason we all (me included) believe these myths and transform them into scientific truth.

You only use 10% of your brain

Movies like limitless promote the inability to access vast areas of the brain, however, by taking a drug we can enter parts of the brain that we don’t use. fMRI scans show that even for the most simplest of tasks like moving your hand use a lots of different areas of the area brain (Gordon, 2008).  Control of motor output requires an enormous amount of brain activation because it deals with planning, and implementing how the muscles move (Beyerstein, 1999). The brain doesn’t allow itself to simply wait around to be used. If nerve cells aren’t used they are used for a different function in other areas of the brain or they degenerate and die; use it or lose it.  Chudler states that the brain takes up 20% of the body’s resources, so why would our brains have evolved to be so big if it weren’t being used? This myth derives from the self-help literature in regards to the ability of reaching all that untapped potential in a book written by Dale Carnegie called How to Win Friends and Influence People. We would all like to believe that we can better ourselves in regards to how we use our brain. However, this is already achieved.  We are constantly learning new things and develop new memories. Not because we are using an undiscovered area of the brain, but because we form new connections and loose old connections between nerve cells.

The Mozart Effect – Listening to his music makes you clever

Listening to classical music and in particular Mozart has allegedly has a significant long term benefits for thinking ability/ mental function, when it’s played to young children. Speculation suggests that there is something in the rhythm of the music that causes this. Supposedly through tapping into the resources used for higher reasoning by priming certain brain circuits with music to enhance cognitive ability thus increasing intelligence.

However, there is no scientific evidence to suggest the listening to Mozart has any long term effect on babies’ cognitive abilities. Grant informs that this myth derives from Roucher and Colleagues study which was wrongly interpreted by the media which snowballed into the Amadeus enhanced IQ myth. No evidence that listening to any type of music enhances intelligence. But it didn’t stop a Governor of a US state to provide new and expectant mothers with classical music CDs to try and make his future constituents more intelligent.  Instead research shows that music increases alertness, which had a short term effect on performance, but does not enhance cognitive functions. We like the fact that the ability to enhance or improve our brain capacity can be simply achieved which makes it more desirable.

We all believe in bizarre things but these also seem to be having an effect on the way we interpret scientific research, so the next time you hear something, remember to check out the facts first!!!!! (or we’ll be saying move over ear plugs there is a new friend in town….right nostril plugs)

Interesting Reads

• Limitless trailer
• Gordon (2008)
• Chudler
• How to Win Friends and Influence People
• The Mozart Effect

*Images obtained from Google

Reading Minds: Cheap Trick or a Scientific Ability

Reading Minds: Cheap Trick or a Scientific Ability

Whatever your opinion about Psychic Sally or Mystic Meg, to a certain extent, some claim that the human species are mind-readers. By our powers of reasoning based on past experiences, knowledge of emotions and catalogue of memories we try to make educated guesses about what the other person is thinking. Whether or not we are actually any good at reading other people is another question. Siegel (in his book) calls the skill of reading others a perceptual ability in which the brain creates maps to deduce the mental state of another person. According to him, It’s how we know when we are being; lied to or told the truth, manipulated or seduced. It allows us to negotiate and, compete or cooperate with others. From a more empirical perspective, years of research has been conducted in this area and, studies show that we humans are not actually that good at it. In a study by Ickes (1993) it was shown that only 20% of participants were able to accurately guess a stranger’s feelings. So if Humans are not effective at it, what makes scientific equipment so good at decoding internal vocalisations? Although it is not truly mind-reading, to a certain degree the following study showed that, we now have the ability to interpret words, even before they are spoken (Pasley et al. 2012). This very recent study with a small sample, but shows the researchers were able to reconstruct words using brain activity alone.

This study used 15 patients who were undergoing brain surgery. Whilst undergoing the surgery, patients were asked to listen to a mix of 47 real and made-up words as well as sentences. During the task, electrical signals from the brain were recorded by sensors placed in the lateral temporal cortex.

Specifically the electrodes were placed in the superior temporal gyrus as this is thought to be important in speech processing.  The study showed that words are broken down into complex patterns of electrical activity and by using a mathematical system; researchers were able to decode it into a rough version of the word using a computer program.

The sound patterns (which can be seen above) showed that by using the mathematical system, researchers were able to recognise specific words just by looking at recordings of brain activity. The computer system managed to correctly identify 89% of the words, compared to the 50% identified by guessing.

So, a question to all you techy guys; could a mind-reading device become reality?

Although in its early stages this study does seem to suggest that a device could be invented that has the ability to translate thought into speech. A device which could, have huge benefits in its application. Once refined, it could be used to help those who cannot talk, communicate in the future, for instance, those with psychological or neurological disorders such as locked-in-syndrome and speech impediments.

Interesting Reads:

Mindful Brain by Siegel

Empathetic Accuracy: Ickes (1993)

Science decodes internal voices

Pasley et al. (2012) Reconstructing Speech from Human Auditory Cortex

*images obtained from public sources – Google/ BBC News

The Science of Communication

The Science of Communication

Psychological research has many real world applications to help guide us through everyday life. Using the face to express emotions plays an important role in communication of feelings; there evidently is a time and a place for every expression. People can produce around 20,000 different facial expressions (Birdwhistell, 1970). This repertoire of facial expressions is based on 6 basic emotions (seen in the picture above). Similar to the process of colour mixing when these 6 primary emotions are blended together they produce an array of varying expressions (Ekman, 1982). Research undertaken in the world of social psychology has acknowledged that we use this form of Non-verbal communication in a variety of ways (Patterson, 1983).  We use non-verbal communication to;

• Gage information about feeling and intentions of others
• To help regulate interactions and express intimacy
• To establish dominance/control
• To facilitate goal fulfillment

The scientific study of facial expression largely focuses on the way different expressions convey, different emotions. However, there are marked cultural and situational display rules, which dictate how appropriate it is to express an emotion in a certain context. Research shows that both universal and cultural components are involved in recognising and experiencing emotions, as well as  the way they are expressed in others and individuals themselves. In Japan, for instance, people are taught to suppress emotions of anger and show expressions of laughter and happiness instead. Whereas, in Mediterranean cultures, men are discouraged from showing emotions while women are encouraged to express feelings (Argyle, 1975; Matsumoto, 2004). Cultural differences in interpreting basic expressions can be seen in a study conducted by Russell (2004).

From the table, it can be seen that people from different cultures have shown varying degrees of success in deciphering the meaning of different emotions. Three categories of people were compared. The three conditions were; people who lived in western societies and are literate, people from non-western societies and are literate, as well as those who were also not from western societies but not literate. Recognition of Happiness is high in all cultures. Russell concluded that identifying various other expressions depend on, what is deemed culturally appropriate and exposure to how to express that emotion. These differences are due to the differences in display rules.

As you can see communication is a big part of our everyday lives, and research into this area of social psychology is extremely beneficial. Real world applications of studies into facial expression as a form of non-verbal communication, and Ekman’s research into basic emotions, have helped develop American Sign Language as an alternative form of communication. Facial expressions or cues are more than a representation of emotion; they are also a way of enhancing or even replacing the use of speech. We raise an eyebrow in an attempt to question a situation; we furrow our eyebrows and frown when we are not amused and so on and so forth. In a world where your face can tell a thousand stories, next time you smile, be sure you’re pulling the right one!!

 

 

*All images were obtained from google