The potential for false memories is bigger than what Brewin and Andrews suggest /

H. Otgaar, H. Merckelbach, M. Jelicic, T. Smeets

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorScientificpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Brewin and Andrews (2016) reviewed the literature on false memory propensity for childhood events. In this commentary, we critically evaluate their basic claim that proneness to false memories of childhood experiences is more limited than has been articulated in the literature. We show that Brewin and Andrews were selective in their inclusion of false memory studies, thereby ignoring relevant research related to autobiographical false memories. Equally important, and in contrast to what Brewin and Andrews claim, we show that implanted false memories elicited by misinformation are characterized by high confidence.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)24-25
JournalApplied Cognitive Psychology
Volume31
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The potential for false memories is bigger than what Brewin and Andrews suggest /'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this