Predicting and projecting memory: Error and bias in metacognitive judgements underlying testimony evaluation

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Rebecca K. Helm, Bethany Growns
{"title":"Predicting and projecting memory: Error and bias in metacognitive judgements underlying testimony evaluation","authors":"Rebecca K. Helm,&nbsp;Bethany Growns","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Metacognitive judgements of what another person would remember had they experienced a stimulus—that is social metamemory judgements, are likely to be important in evaluations of testimony in criminal and civil justice systems. This paper develops and tests predictions about two sources of error in social metamemory judgements that have the potential to be important in legal contexts—errors resulting from beliefs informed by own memory being inappropriately applied to the memory of others, and errors resulting from differential experience of an underlying stimulus.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>We examined social metamemory judgements in two experimental studies. In Experiment 1 (<i>N</i> = 323), participants were required to make either social metamemory judgements relating to faces or predictions relating to their own memory for faces. In Experiment 2 (<i>N</i> = 275), we manipulated participant experience of faces, holding the described experience of the person whose memory was being assessed constant and asked participants to make social metamemory judgements.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>As predicted, judgements relating to the memory of others were prone to inaccuracy. Whilst participants making predictions relating to their own memory performed above chance, participants making social metamemory judgements performed no better than chance. Social metamemory judgements were also influenced by the way stimuli were experienced by an assessor, even where this experience did not correspond to the experience of the person whose memory they were assessing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Having our own experiences of memory does not necessarily make us well-placed to assess the memory of others, and, in fact, our own experiences of memory can even be misleading in making judgements about the memory of others.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lcrp.12232","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Metacognitive judgements of what another person would remember had they experienced a stimulus—that is social metamemory judgements, are likely to be important in evaluations of testimony in criminal and civil justice systems. This paper develops and tests predictions about two sources of error in social metamemory judgements that have the potential to be important in legal contexts—errors resulting from beliefs informed by own memory being inappropriately applied to the memory of others, and errors resulting from differential experience of an underlying stimulus.

Method

We examined social metamemory judgements in two experimental studies. In Experiment 1 (N = 323), participants were required to make either social metamemory judgements relating to faces or predictions relating to their own memory for faces. In Experiment 2 (N = 275), we manipulated participant experience of faces, holding the described experience of the person whose memory was being assessed constant and asked participants to make social metamemory judgements.

Results

As predicted, judgements relating to the memory of others were prone to inaccuracy. Whilst participants making predictions relating to their own memory performed above chance, participants making social metamemory judgements performed no better than chance. Social metamemory judgements were also influenced by the way stimuli were experienced by an assessor, even where this experience did not correspond to the experience of the person whose memory they were assessing.

Conclusions

Having our own experiences of memory does not necessarily make us well-placed to assess the memory of others, and, in fact, our own experiences of memory can even be misleading in making judgements about the memory of others.

Abstract Image

预测与投射记忆:元认知判断中的错误与偏差
在刑事和民事司法系统中,对一个人在经历刺激后会记得什么的元认知判断——即社会元记忆判断——可能对证词的评估很重要。本文发展并测试了社会元记忆判断中两种错误来源的预测,这两种错误来源在法律环境中可能很重要——由自己的记忆所告知的信念不适当地应用于他人的记忆所导致的错误,以及由潜在刺激的不同经验所导致的错误。方法对社会元记忆判断进行两项实验研究。在实验1 (N = 323)中,参与者被要求做出与面孔有关的社会元记忆判断或与他们自己对面孔的记忆有关的预测。在实验2 (N = 275)中,我们操纵被试对面孔的经验,保持被试对被试记忆的描述不变,并要求被试做出社会元记忆判断。结果正如预测的那样,与他人记忆有关的判断容易出错。虽然参与者根据自己的记忆进行预测的表现高于随机,但参与者进行社会元记忆判断的表现并不比随机好。社会元记忆判断也会受到评估者对刺激的体验方式的影响,即使这种体验与被评估者的体验并不相符。拥有自己的记忆经验并不一定能让我们很好地评估他人的记忆,事实上,我们自己的记忆经验甚至可能在对他人的记忆做出判断时产生误导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信