False memories are recollections that are partially or entirely inaccurate but are experienced as genuine. They range from minor distortions (misremembering details of a real event) to entirely fabricated memories (remembering events that never happened). Far from being rare anomalies, false memories are a natural consequence of how memory works — as a reconstructive process that fills gaps using expectations, schemas, and inferences rather than replaying stored recordings.
The DRM Paradigm
The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm, revived by Henry Roediger and Kathleen McDermott (1995), provides a reliable laboratory method for creating false memories. Participants study lists of words related to a critical non-presented word (e.g., bed, rest, awake, tired, dream — all related to "sleep" but "sleep" is never presented). On subsequent tests, participants frequently recall or recognize the critical lure with high confidence, often claiming to vividly "remember" its presentation. This demonstrates that semantic associations can create compelling false memories.
Critical lure recognition: ~70-80% (often with "remember" judgments)
These false memories persist across delays and are resistant to warnings.
The Misinformation Effect
Elizabeth Loftus's extensive research on the misinformation effect has shown that post-event information can distort memory for the original event. In the classic paradigm, participants witness an event (such as a car accident video), then receive misleading information about it (a question mentioning a "stop sign" when there was actually a "yield sign"), and later incorrectly "remember" the misinformation as part of the original event. The misinformation effect has profound implications for eyewitness testimony and investigative interviewing.
In the "lost in the mall" study, Loftus and Pickrell (1995) showed that entirely false childhood memories can be implanted through suggestion. Participants were given three true childhood events (supplied by family members) and one fabricated event (being lost in a shopping mall). Approximately 25% of participants eventually "remembered" the fabricated event, often adding vivid details. Subsequent studies have implanted memories of being attacked by an animal, being hospitalized, and other events. These findings demonstrate the malleability of autobiographical memory and raise serious concerns about recovered memory therapy.
Mechanisms of False Memory
False memories arise through multiple mechanisms. Source monitoring failures (confusing where information came from — did I see it or just imagine it?) account for many false memories. Associative activation (spreading activation from studied items to related non-studied items) explains the DRM effect. Schematic reconstruction (filling in gaps with schema-consistent information) explains many memory distortions for real events. Imagination inflation (merely imagining an event increases confidence that it occurred) shows how mental simulation can create false memories.
Neural Basis
Neuroimaging studies have found that true and false memories activate largely overlapping brain regions, explaining why they feel equally real. However, subtle differences have been identified: true memories tend to produce greater activation in sensory and perceptual regions, while false memories may produce greater activation in frontal regions associated with monitoring and decision processes. These differences are too subtle to allow reliable individual-memory discrimination but suggest partially distinct underlying processes.