“One day, we will be able to
determine which memories are true, and which memories are false.”
This
question was our debate question. I was on the opposing team for this
statement, and I remain on that side. I believe there is far more evidence for
this side than for the pro side, and I can show it through scientific support.
Elizabeth Loftus, a leading expert in memory and false memories, has been
studying memory for 40 years. On multiple occasions, in multiple articles, and
even on a TED talk, Loftus supports her claim that “without independent
corroboration, little can be done to tell a false memory from a true one.” This
is increasingly accurate as we continue to see the flaws with independent
corroboration and psychiatrist manipulation; independent corroboration can only
be as reliable as often as the person is with them. Very few people can corroborate
every memory or be aware of everything that has or has not happened to an
individual. Psychiatrists have also, on a surplus of occasions, embedded false
memories into their patients, most often of memories of abuse. The ability to
embed false memories so easily further complicates the ability to differentiate
between the two.
Biologically
and neurologically speaking, the neural patterns are very similar for true and
false memories. When it comes to phantom recollection, for example, though it
occurs less frequently than false memories, it actually activates the medial
temporal lobe in the same way true memories do. The pro side argues that fMRI
scans can differentiate between true and false memories based on grey matter in
the brain, but this is inaccurate because it is too difficult to differentiate
between the two in grey matter because it is so difficult to differentiate
between the two in general. German researchers attempted to determine a
physiological “tell” to differentiate between the two and after hooking
participants up to the machine they concluded that “skin conductance was the
only measurement that was sensitive enough to measure.” All this tells us is
that people respond physiologically to being hooked up to a machine and
participating in a research study; it does not show us anything specific enough
to conclude it is related to the relationship between physiological responses
and recalling true/false memories.
False
memories can also be equally emotional to true memories. For example, those
court cases which revolve around false memories of abuse – those patients often
have very strong, emotional, and realistic “memories” of the abuse and when
they recall it they do so with those emotions and beliefs. They do not have
doubts about the memories they are recalling and genuinely believe them to be
true. Another flaw stems from the questionability of true memories in general;
even true memories are constructed and reconstructed, not so much a
recollection. Loftus delves into this deeper saying, “the process of calling it
[a memory] into conscious awareness can change it, and now you’re storing
something that’s different.” So if true memories become increasingly more
falsified (however accidentally), how will we ever be able to differentiate
between the two. If true isn’t always true, what is false?
I completely agree with this post. It is very difficult to find the difference between false and real memories. Specifically in terms of using science as often emotions are not scientific. The way a person feels ultimately cannot be control. Also we all see and experience events differently than other.
ReplyDelete-Chantal McGovern
I must say that I disagree with this post, Kaci. I have copy and pasted the specific reasons for my disagreement.
ReplyDeleteNeural Correlates of True Memory, False Memory, and Deception is a study published in 2008. The study finds that it is possible to detect the difference in brain activity between deception and false memory, despite the fact that subjects respond with “I know” in both processes. While this does not distinguish between true and false memories, it does show that brain activity is quite specific and distinct for different aspects of thoughts, and with the proper knowledge and technology, distinguishing between true and false memories using sufficiently adequate brain scanning techniques is not out of the realm of possibility. Frontoparietal Network Involved in Successful Retrieval from Episodic Memory. Spatial and Temporal Analyses Using fMRI and ERP is another article that suggested the current impossibility of distinguishing between true and false memories using brain scanning techniques, but the article does not eliminate distinguishing between the two as a future possibility. True and False DRM Memories: Differences Detected with an Implicit Task is a study published in 2012. The DRM paradigm is a procedure used to study false memory. This study explains that while true and false DRM memories are indistinguishable at the explicit level, they can potentially be detected at the implicit level.
Dr. Elizabeth Loftus responds to an interview question asking whether or not we will one day be able to tell the difference between true and false memories by saying that we are far away from that day, but she does not say that it is impossible. In an article that she wrote with Daniel M. Bernstein, titled “How to Tell If a Particular Memory Is True or False”, she explains that it may be virtually impossible to tell if a particular memory is true or false without independent corroboration. She suggests that a potentially productive direction for future research may be to compare true memories with rich (vivid, detailed) false memories, because while there are currently few discernible differences between the two, we may be able to find significant differences using future research that will allow us to tell the difference between the two. Loftus and Bernstein explain that focusing on groups of memories, the individual reporting the memory, and single rich memories are currently the most viable methods of determining the veracity of a memory. Loftus and Bernstein also assert that once we have acquired better imaging tools, analysis techniques, and tools not yet invented, we may be able to one day reliably distinguish between true and false memories without the need for independent corroboration.
DeleteOne day, we will be able to distinguish between true and false memories. This is already possible through the use of independent corroborative evidence. However, it is not currently possibly to distinguish between true and false memories using brain scanning techniques, or any other tests. It feels slightly unnecessary to reference four different scientific articles as the basis for my opinion, because of the nature of the debate question. We cannot predict all of the different potential directions that science can go in the far or even near future, thus it is impossible to deny the possibility that one day it will be possible to distinguish between true and false memories. As Loftus and Bernstein asserted in their collaborative article, even if current techniques are not adequate, there is no way of knowing what other potentially viable techniques will be developed in the future. It is primarily on the basis of their article that I developed my opinion.
TL;DR, while I absolutely agree with you that it's supremely difficult to distinguish between true and false memories currently, I believe that if the human race continues to 1. exist and 2. develop scientifically, there is potentially a 100% guarantee that we will develop the technology and skills required to distinguish between true and false memories. If not in the next half-century, century, or even the next thousand years, then undoubtedly by the end of the existence of our species (or of our constant scientific development) some method will be found.