The Idea Of Spark Memory In Ted Talk By Scott Fraser

The study of creation of false memories has been a topic of interest since the 1930s when Bartlett (1932) conducted the first experiment on the topic. Though the results of this experiment were never replicated, they contributed greatly to research by distinguishing between reproductive and reconstructive memory (Bartlett 1932 as cited in Roediger & McDermott, 1995). Reproductive memory refers to accurate production of material from memory and is assumed to be associated with remembering simplified materials (e.g., lists). Reconstructive memory emphasizes the active process of filling in missing elements while remembering and is associated with materials rich in meaning (e.g., stories).

In this TEDTalk, Steven Pinker introduced an interesting trend in societal violence. The talk began by presenting fax that showed a dramatic decrease in the amount of violent crime beginning as far back as the earliest human hunter-gatherers. In many places during that time period, the chances of dying at the hands of another human were as high is sixty percent. Although the media and people tend to believe we are living in a time of extreme violence, we are actually living during one of the most peaceful times in human history. Even though the 20th Century witnessed tragedies such as the Holocaust, Rwanda, Stalin’s mass executions, and two World Wars, the chances of a human by violent means was less than three percent.

False memories have been studied science the early 1990’s because they have become controversial topic. In the beginning they was no thought that your memory would be unfaithful and that if you had a memory that you “recovered” it had to be true because your memory couldn’t fail you. Could it? Well one woman’s disbelief caused her, Susan Clancy, who was a Harvard University graduate student at the time decided that while everyone else was arguing over the accuracy of recovered memories, she would create a study on them (Grierson 1). Clancy first started out by interviewing her subjects that said to have recovered memories of abuse after they had gone through therapy. The stories were horrifying but she was brought up to believe that what they were telling her was true. But, soon after she found herself wondering if they had even really went through these events that they “recovered”. When she spoke out against the recovered memory patients saying that they couldn’t of forgotten such a traumatic memory and that they had created a false memory by going to the therapy the hate mail started coming in (Grierson 3). Throughout this time many other scientists started to do more and more research on false memories and most of the studies have concluded with the same information. “The false memory researchers point to other research showing that traumatic events are normally remembered all too well. They argue that

The authenticity of repressed memories has been the cause of much controversy in the psychology world. Some even refer to these controversies as the “memory wars”. One side supports the idea of repressed memories, saying that there are multiple reasons for memories to be forgotten and retrieved later. The latter disagrees with how legitimate repressed memories are, since there is no way to prove the honesty of the memories presented.

Memory is a cognitive function of the brain that is often taken for granted. Memory may have many purposes, but most importantly it is essentially a record of an entire life span. From this perspective memory is the most important aspect of consciousness. Unfortunately, through formal experimentation it has been shown that memory is fairly inaccurate, inconsistent, and often influenced by our own experiences as well as the bias of others. Memory is not only affected during an observed event, but there are instances where memory can be influenced after an event as well. There are also instances where memory can be affected retroactively due to personal experiences and biases. Incorrectly recalling the memories of one’s life is usually not

The human mind is a malleable and dishonest contraption. Perceptions of past events can be easily damaged and changed into completely new memories, whether on purpose or by fault of recollection. Philip K. Dick’s “We Can Remember it For You Wholesale” asks whether this flawed system of neurotransmitters could be used as an advantage for the human race by mapping and implementing false memories. This way, people of Earth can experience anything they put their mind to (pun intended) even if such an experience would be impossible for them for any reason. This futuristic premise, while first asking whether the mind is as malleable as this prediction suggests, also begs the question of what truly counts as an experience. If one completely believes a memory is true, has physical evidence, and believes the event is not only possible but has been achieved, the line between a false and true memory blurs into subjectivity.

In chapter three of Mistakes Were Made But Not By Me, The authors imply that our memory is reconstructive, almost like a puzzle with pieces that we produce ourselves. Our memory is manipulated by self justification to either protect ourselves or our beliefs. Memory is reconstructive in a way that it replaces parts of memories and fills them with what we believe or think occurred. Reconstruction of our memory is a method applying details to a memory that may be beneficial or contrary to others memories. Because we manipulate our memory laboriously, our memories may become contradictory to others memories.

Neurobiological studies show that both suppression and recall and the creation of false memories are possible. (Kandel, 1994) In this paper both sides of the debate will be analyzed and evaluated.

There are two prominent distortions of the episodic memory system: forgetting and the false memory effect. False memory is the propensity to report an event as part of an episodic experience that was not actually present (Holliday, Brainerd, & Reyna, 2011). Several theories give an explanation for this effect, but the most prominent one is the fuzzy trace theory,

After a new memory is learnt, it enters the process of encoding during which the memory is labile and capable of disruption until it becomes stabilised over a period of time (Nader & Einarsson, 2010; Nader et al, 2000). This process is called consolidation and originally consisted of the theory that once stabilised in the brain, it remains fixed (Suzuki et al, 2004). This theory has been rebutted by the acceptance of reconsolidation, a theory that imposes the ideology that when memories are retrieved, through similar experiences (Lee, 2009), they become labile until,

And the second way to recover memories is therapy, therapists use many devices such as “questionnaires, group therapy, books, fantasy therapy, and hypnosis”. Overall, through some unreliable reasons about therapy methods, “ judges allow testimony of spontaneously resurfaced memories into court without collaborating evidence. They could also allow evidence of therapy-recovered memories, but only when accompanied by corroborating evidence, proof of injury, or heightened requirements of therapists”. Therefore, spontaneous resurfaced memories seems more reliable, less “vulnerable to the outside influences” than

Memory does not work like a video camera, smoothly recording every detail. Instead, memory is more of a constructive process. We remember the details that we find most important and relevant. Due to the reconstructive nature of memory, the assimilation of old and new information has the ability to cause vulnerable memories to become distorted. This is also known as the misinformation effect (Loftus, 1997). It is not uncommon for individuals to fill in memory gaps with what they assume they must have experienced. We not only distort memories for events that we have observed, but, we may also have false memories for events that never occurred at all. False memories are “often created by combing actual memories with suggestions received from

Memory facilitates necessary functions in daily life activities, but it is not a perfect mechanism in operation. Goldstein (2011) states that memory is, “…the process involved in retaining, retrieving, and using information about stimuli, images, events, ideas, and skills after the original information is no longer present” (p.116). There are many adaptive functions within the complexities of the human memory system and the interlinked constructs between each function leave room for doubt in the accuracy of recollection. Study of the human mind has opened avenues of discovery on the inner workings of our brains and the resulting knowledge suggests that humans are prone to creating false memories and even remembering things that never actually happened. A great deal of information has been written explaining the nature of memory errors and within the following pages a real-life case offers a glimpse into how recall distortions and memory errors can wield unpleasant consequences. Memory errors can be avoided with a significant effort, but the truth remains that no one is perfect and memories are subject to individual bias.

Many of our abilities are innate and that includes memory. Memory is tightly connected with learning, which then can be influenced the individual's behavior in the future. In terms of cognition, the psychologist focuses on the way we process information. The information is brought and understand into the mind in various of ways and is then manipulated by placing into a sensory, short term or long term storage and is recalling and retrieved when necessary. Even so, retrieving memory was no longer the process of picking out an asymmetrical experience from storage, rather than the reconstruction of experience of using the schema as a guide. (Gray 2010)

Craik, F. I., Rose, N. S., & Gopie, N. “Recognition Without Awareness: Encoding and Retrieval Factors.” American Psychological Association. (2015). 1271-1273.Web.