Оё хотира худро чун дақиқ, ки фикр мекунед он аст,?

Is Your Memory as Accurate as You Think it is?

Мо ҳама чизро фаромӯш – but are the things that we do remember as accurate as we’d like to believe?

Садо Guardian.co.ukИн мақола дар мавзӯи “Is your memory as accurate as you think it is?” was written by Pete Etchells, for theguardian.com on Monday 8th August 2016 06.30 ЗҲҶ - ЗАМОНИ ҲАМОҲАНГИ ҶАҲОН

Mind gamers: How good do you reckon your memory is? We might forget things from time to time, but the stuff we do remember is pretty accurate, рост? The trouble is, our memory isn’t as infallible as we might want to believe, and you can test this for yourself using the simple experiment below.

False memory test lists
Read through each of the three lists in turn, but don’t spend too long on any one word. Сурат: Pete Etchells for the Guardian

Try it yourself

Take a look at the three lists above, and read each word for about a second.

All done? Great.

Now we’re going to do a simple recognition test – below is another list of words for you to look at. Without looking back, note down which of them appeared in the three lists you just scanned. No cheating!

Боло – Chair – хоб – SeatSlow – мустаҳкам – YawnMountainSweet

If you said that top, seat ва yawn were in the lists, you’re spot on. монанди, if you think that оҳиста, ширин ва мустаҳкам didn’t appear anywhere, you’re also right. дар бораи chair, mountain ва sleep ҳатто? They sound like they should have been in the lists, but they never made an appearance. Some of you may have spotted this, but a lot of people tend to say, with a fair amount of certainty, that the words were present.

False recognition and the DRM paradigm

This experiment comes from a classic 1995 омӯзиши by Henry L. Roediger and Kathleen McDermott at Rice University in Texas. Based on earlier work by James Deese (hence the name Deese-Roediger-McDermott, or DRM, paradigm), participants heard a series of word lists, which they then had to recall from memory. After a brief conversation with the researcher, the participants were then given a new list of words. Critically, this new list contained some words that were associated with every single item on each of the initial lists – for example, ҳол он sleep doesn’t appear on list 3 боло, it’s related to each word that does appear (bed, rest, tired, ва ғайра).

Баъдӣ, the participants had to say how confident they were that the words in the new list had appeared previously. Roediger and McDermott’s results showed that people claimed to recognise the associated words (мисли sleep) about as often as words that were actually presented on the list – around 85% замон. Ба ибораи дигар, people were claiming to remember things, fairly confidently, that hadn’t happened.

There are a number of reasons why this effect occurs. One suggestion put forward by Roediger and McDermott relates to something known as associative processes; because all of the words in a given list are related to each other, they are more likely to activate related words in our memory. Word stem completion tasks help to highlight this point. If I say the word ‘beer’, and ask you to fill in the blank here:

_ I N E

You might be more likely to say W, even though D, F, L and M would all be perfectly acceptable. That’s because beer and wine are related concepts, and saying one makes the other easier to recall in memory.

Албатта, other factors come into play with the DRM paradigm. It might also happen because you’re thinking of the word sleep when you read the related list, which leads you mistakenly think that you actually did read the word later on. Regardless though, studies of false recognition make one thing clear: our memories aren’t always as accurate as we’d like to believe.

guardian.co.uk © нигаҳбони Ахбор & ВАО Limited 2010

27203 3