Misrepresentations and flawed logic about the prevalence of false memories

Robert Nash, Kimberley Wade, Maryanne Garry, Elizabeth Loftus, James Ost

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

70 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Brewin and Andrews (2016) propose that just 15% of people, or even fewer, are susceptible to false childhood memories. If this figure were true, then false memories would still be a serious problem. But the figure is higher than 15%. False memories occur even after a few short and low-pressure interviews, and with each successive interview they become richer, more compelling, and more likely to occur. It is therefore dangerously misleading to claim that the scientific data provide an “upper bound” on susceptibility to memory errors. We also raise concerns about the peer review process.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31-33
JournalApplied Cognitive Psychology
Volume31
Issue number1
Early online date14 Oct 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2017

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Misrepresentations and flawed logic about the prevalence of false memories'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this