We send special thanks Dr. Mary Ann Foley and Dr. Karen Zabrucky for collaborative work on research projects informing our methodology in this paper.

All methods described here have been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Georgia State University.
1. Material Preparation
<ol>
	<li>Using the word lists attached in the supplemental materials, create four separate presentations: Imagery A, Imagery B, Non-imagery A, and Non-imagery B. Ensure that all four presentations are void of templates or designs, with white backgrounds and black font. The two list orders, A and B, serve to balance any effects of list order or fatigue. The two imagery versions serve to assess the effects of imagery instructions on memory.
	<ol>
		<li>Begin each presentation with a content slide titled, &#34;Instructions&#34;. In the body of the instructions slide, include the relevant instructions listed below in 24+ point font according to whether the presentation is designated as imagery or non-imagery.
		<ol>
			<li>Include these instructions for Imagery A and Imagery B presentations: &#34;I will present words from a list, one at a time, on the projector. As each word is presented, please create a mental image of that word in your mind. Please do not mark on the packet while the list is being presented. When each list is finished, the projector will indicate, &#34;RECALL&#34;, and you will write down the words you remember from the list in the packet provided. Try to use the images you created to help you recall the words. After you have written down all the words that you can remember, please indicate overall how easy it was for you to create mental images for that list. You will be given 45 seconds to recall the list and rate the ease of creating images, and then we will move on to the next list. When we do so, please flip to the next page in the packet. It is important that you do not revisit any old lists once we have moved on. There will be 11 lists in total, the first being a practice list. After all the lists have been presented, you will be asked to complete a word search task.&#34;</li>
			<li>Include these instructions for Non-imagery A and Non-imagery B presentations: &#34;I will present words from a list, one at a time, on the projector. Pay attention to the words on the projector. Please do not mark on your packet as the words are being presented. When each list is finished, the projector will indicate &#34;RECALL&#34;, and you will write down the words you remember from the list in the packet provided. You will be given 45 seconds to recall as many words from the list as you can, then we will move on to the next list. When we do so, please flip to the next page in the packet. It is important that you do not revisit any old lists once we have moved on. There will be 11 lists in total, the first being a practice list. After all the lists have been presented, you will be asked to complete a word search task.&#34;</li>
		</ol>
		</li>
		<li>Following the instructional slide, create timed slides to present lists and prompt recall. All text is center-aligned. List words are 72 point font, and all instructional cues are 44 pt. font.
		<ol>
			<li>Create slide 2 and include the text &#34;Prepare for the practice list&#34; centered vertically and horizontally on the slide in 44 point font.</li>
			<li>On slides 3-10, present the practice list words in order, one word per slide, centered horizontally and vertically, in lower case font. Designate a slide duration of 5 seconds by going under Transitions in the menu and selecting to advance the slide after 00:05.00.</li>
			<li>On slide 11, indicate the end of the practice list and the beginning of recall. Include &#34;End of Practice List&#34; in black font with &#34;RECALL&#34; double-spaced below it in red font. Designate a slide duration of 45 seconds.</li>
		</ol>
		</li>
		<li>After the practice list recall slide, create slides to present the test lists in the same manner. 
		&#8203;NOTE: The procedure for each list is 10 slides long. The first slide indicates &#34;Prepare for List X&#34;. The following 8 slides include the list words in order, each on a separate slide with 5 second durations. Following the list word slides, a recall slide with a designated duration of 45 seconds indicates &#34;End of List X&#34; in black font with &#34;RECALL&#34; double-spaced beneath it in red font. Adapt the &#34;X&#34; in the &#34;End of List X&#34; text to indicate the order of the lists in that particular presentation, not the order of the lists as they are listed in the appendix. For example, the 3rd list to occur in the presentation will read &#34;End of List 3&#34;.</li>
		<li>Ensure that the order of the lists in the slides varies according to the particular presentation . According to the numbered designations in the word lists attached to the supplemental materials, Imagery A and Non-Imagery A presentations present lists in ascending order: practice, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Imagery B and Non-imagery B presentations present lists in descending order: practice, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.</li>
		<li>After the recall slide for the last list, ensure that slide 112 includes the following text &#34;End of word lists. Turn to the next page in your packets and please take the next 7 minutes to work on the attached word searches.&#34; Designate a slide duration of 7 minutes.</li>
		<li>Create slide 113 to include &#34;End of word searching. One last activity&#34;. This slide has no designated duration. Create a final slide, 114, that includes a thank you.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Create two different versions of recall packets, imagery and non-imagery, in a word processor. Page 1 of both versions prompts participants to write down their name, gender, age, major, or any other demographic variables of interest. Page 13 of both versions includes a word search with dimensions of 20 x 20 letters or larger. Ensure that no list or practice words occur in the word search.
	<ol>
		<li>Ensure that pages 2-12 in the recall packets include repeated recall activity pages, which vary according to the version.</li>
		<li>Ensure that recall activity pages for the imagery version include the following instructions at the top of the page: &#34;Instructions: Create an image of each item in your head. Use the images you created to help you recall the words.&#34; Below that, the activity page includes &#34;Recall:&#34; with at least &#8531; of the page following it left blank. At the bottom of the page, include the following prompt: &#34;Overall, how easily did these images come to mind for this list? Circle one&#34;. Below the ease of imagery prompt, include the following options for participants to circle: &#34;0 - Not easy, 1 - Somewhat easy, 2 - Very easy&#34;.</li>
		<li>Ensure that recall activity pages for the non-imagery version include the following instructions at the top of the page: &#34;Instructions: Please recall and write down all the words you remember from the current list.&#34; Below that, the page indicates &#34;Recall:&#34; with no other prompts following.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Obtain the final recognition test from the supplementary materials and do not attach it to the recall packets. It is an individual page to be handed out separately. The final recognition test consists of 80 items total.
	<ol>
		<li>Of the 80 items, use 30 from the lists presented on the presentation slides at the start of the study. The 30 presented items chosen for the recognition memory test are the 1st, 3rd and 7th words from each of the 10 lists presented (15 semantic items and 15 phonological items).</li>
		<li>Include each of the 10 critical lures related to the 10 presented lists (5 semantic and 5 phonological) on the test.</li>
		<li>For the additional 40 items, use the DRM lists not presented to participants, including the 1st, 3rd and 7th items from each of 10 non-presented lists (15 semantic and 15 phonological items), as well as the associated critical lure (5 semantic and 5 phonological) for each of the 10 non-presented lists. The non-presented lists are located along with the presented lists in supplementary materials.</li>
		<li>Arrange the items on the recognition memory test such that one item from each of the 10 presented lists and 10 non-presented lists appears prior to any critical lures. List items are not thematically blocked on the memory test.</li>
		<li>Ensure that instructions on the recognition test prompt participants to indicate &#34;yes&#34; or &#34;no&#34; in writing as to whether each item appeared in any of the lists presented.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
2. Recruitment
<ol>
	<li>Recruit at least four face-to-face sections of the same, or very similar, undergraduate class. If possible, recruit non-psychology classes or introductory courses that have not learned about false memory paradigms.
	<ol>
		<li>Include all students who are enrolled in the recruited classes and have normal or corrected vision to participate.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Assign each class section to 1 of the 4 presentation types, distributing the number of classes assigned to each presentation type as evenly as possible and prioritizing even distribution across imagery and non-imagery presentation types.</li>
</ol>
3. Optional Modifications to Protocol
<ol>
	<li>If the effects of imagery instructions are not of interest, modify the protocol as follows to only include one set of instructions, one type of recall packet, and shorter slide durations.
	<ol>
		<li>Using the word lists attached in supplemental materials, create 2 separate presentations, versions A and B. Present the 10 study lists in ascending order following the practice list in the version A presentation (practice, 1, 2, 3, 4&#8230;), and present the lists in descending order following the practice list in the version B presentation (practice, 10, 9, 8, 7&#8230;).</li>
		<li>Include the non-imagery instructions from protocol item 1.1.1.2 on the first slide of both presentation versions.</li>
		<li>Modify the timed list presentation slides described in 1.1.2.2 to be 2 seconds long instead of 5 seconds. In other words, design the presentation so that each word is presented to participants for 2 seconds. Do not modify any other types of timed slides, like the recall slides (45 seconds) or word search side (7 minutes).</li>
		<li>Create 1 version of the recall packet (i.e., non-imagery version) that includes the traditional non-imagery instructions from protocol item 1.2.3.</li>
		<li>Assign the recruited classes to the 2 presentation types as evenly as possible.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>If the effects of list type (semantic vs. phonological) are not of interest, modify the protocol as follows to only include longer, traditional semantic DRM lists:
	<ol>
		<li>Do not use the word lists included in our supplementary materials, with the exception of the practice list. Instead, select 20 of the unmodified DRM lists included in the original Roediger &#38; McDermott study2. These word lists are 15-items long and all semantically related. Number the selected lists 1-20. Use lists 1-10 as study lists in the presentation and lists 11-20 as filler lists for the recognition test.</li>
		<li>Modify the presentations to accommodate 15-item lists instead of 8-item lists. Following the instruction slide and practice list, the procedure for each test list is 17 slides long. For each list, the first slide indicates &#34;Prepare for List X&#34;, the following 15 slides present the list words one at a time, and the last slide for the list indicates the end of the list and the beginning of recall.</li>
		<li>Modify the recognition test design described in 1.3 to include the 1st, 8th, and 10th words from the 10 study lists and 10 filler lists and their critical lures.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
4. Procedure
<ol>
	<li>At the beginning of a regularly scheduled class session, ask the instructor to leave the room and pull up the presentation that was assigned to that class section.</li>
	<li>Introduce yourself as the researcher and distribute informed consent forms to students. Allow students to read through the informed consent document on their own. Prompt them to complete the informed consent form and to ask any questions about the document or participation.</li>
	<li>Distribute the appropriate recall packets to participants. If using an imagery condition, ensure that classes who were assigned one of the two imagery presentations receive an imagery recall packet. Do not distribute the recognition test yet.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to fill out the initial page of the recall packet with demographic information. Then read the instructions from the presentation aloud with the slide presented.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to flip to the next page in their packet for the practice list, move to presentation slide 3 (i.e., &#34;Prepare for the practice list&#34;), and read the prompt aloud. After reading the prompt, move to slide 4 and allow the presentation to progress through the timed practice list slides.</li>
	<li>When the practice list recall slide expires and automatically moves to the next list prompt slide (i.e., &#34;Prepare for list 1&#34;), prompt participants to ask any questions they have about the procedure. Answer any questions and instruct participants to turn to the next page (pg. 3) in their packet for list 1.</li>
	<li>Once all participants have turned to the next page in their booklet, read the list 1 prompt slide aloud (i.e., &#34;Prepare for list 1&#34;) and progress to the timed list 1 word list and recall slides.</li>
	<li>Continue this procedure for the 9 remaining lists, prompting participants to flip to the next page in their booklet after each recall slide expires, reading the &#34;prepare for list X&#34; slide aloud, and subsequently prompting the timed list slides.</li>
	<li>After recall for list 10, supervise as the presentation prompts participants to turn to the next page in their packet and work on the word search for 7 minutes.</li>
	<li>When the presentation automatically progresses to the final slide (i.e., &#34;One last activity&#34;), collect the recall packets from participants and distribute the final recognition test.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to complete the final recognition test at their own pace and to do their best not to leave any items blank. Once all participants have finished the test, collect the recognition tests and verbally debrief participants (see supplementary materials for debriefing statement).</li>
</ol>

<ol>
	<li>Deese, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=On+the+prediction+of+occurrence+of+particular+verbal+intrusions+in+immediate+recall.">On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology. 58 (1), 17-22 (1959).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., McDermott, K. B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Creating+false+memories:+Remembering+words+not+presented+in+lists.">Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 21 (4), 803-814 (1995).</li><li>Gallo, D. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+fantastic+beliefs:+15+years+of+the+DRM+illusion.">False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion.</a> Memory &amp; Cognition. 38 (7), 833-848 (2010).</li><li>Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Source+attributions+and+false+memories:+A+test+of+the+demand+characteristics+account.">Source attributions and false memories: A test of the demand characteristics account.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 6 (1), 130-135 (1999).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., Balota, D. A., Watson, J. M., Roediger, H. L., Nairne, J. S., Neath, I., Surprenant, A. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Spreading+activation+and+arousal+of+false+memories.">Spreading activation and arousal of false memories.</a> The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder. , 95-115 (2001).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., Gallo, D. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Factors+that+determine+false+recall:+A+multiple+regression+analysis.">Factors that determine false recall: A multiple regression analysis.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 8 (3), 385-407 (2001).</li><li>Collins, A. M., Loftus, E. F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+spreading-activation+theory+of+semantic+processing.">A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.</a> Psychological Review. 82 (6), 407-428 (1975).</li><li>Buchanan, L., Brown, N. R., Cabeza, R., Maitson, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+semantic+lexicon+arrangement.">False memories and semantic lexicon arrangement.</a> Brain and Language. 68 (1-2), 172-177 (1999).</li><li>Watson, J. M., Balota, D. A., Roediger, H. I. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Creating+false+memories+with+hybrid+lists+of+semantic+and+phonological+associates:+Over-additive+false+memories+produced+by+converging+associative+networks.">Creating false memories with hybrid lists of semantic and phonological associates: Over-additive false memories produced by converging associative networks.</a> Journal of Memory And Language. 49 (1), 95-118 (2003).</li><li>Robin, F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+false+memories.">Imagination and false memories.</a> Imagination, Cognition, and Personality. 30 (4), 407-424 (2011).</li><li>Bays, R. B., Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Autobiographical+memories+and+the+DRM+illusion:+Investigating+the+content+and+process+of+lure+activations.">Autobiographical memories and the DRM illusion: Investigating the content and process of lure activations.</a> Applied Cognitive Psychology. 29 (5), 742-752 (2015).</li><li>Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagery+encoding+and+false+recognition+errors:+Exploring+boundary+conditions+of+imagery's+enhancing+effects.">Imagery encoding and false recognition errors: Exploring boundary conditions of imagery's enhancing effects.</a> Memory. 20 (6), 700-716 (2012).</li><li>Foley, M. A., Cowan, E., Schlemmer, E., Belser-Ehrlich, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Acts+of+generating+and+their+sources:+Predicting+the+effects+of+imagery+encoding+on+false+recognition+errors.">Acts of generating and their sources: Predicting the effects of imagery encoding on false recognition errors.</a> Memory. 20 (4), 384-399 (2012).</li><li>Oliver, M., Bays, R. B., Zabrucky, K. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+the+DRM+paradigm:+Effects+of+imagery,+list+and+test+type.">False memories and the DRM paradigm: Effects of imagery, list and test type.</a> TheJournal of General Psychology. 143 (1), 33-48 (2016).</li><li>Ballou, M. R., Sommers, M. S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Similar+phenomena,+different+mechanisms:+Semantic+and+phonological+false+memories+are+produced+by+independent+mechanisms.">Similar phenomena, different mechanisms: Semantic and phonological false memories are produced by independent mechanisms.</a> Memory &amp; cognition. 36 (8), 1450-1459 (2008).</li><li>Garry, M., Manning, C. G., Loftus, E. F., Sherman, S. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+inflation:+Imagining+a+childhood+event+inflates+confidence+that+it+occurred.">Imagination inflation: Imagining a childhood event inflates confidence that it occurred.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 3 (2), 208-214 (1996).</li><li>Garry, M., Polascheck, D. L. L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+memory.">Imagination and memory.</a> Current Directions in Psychological Science. 9 (1), 6-10 (2000).</li><li>Hyman, I. E., Pentland, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+role+mental+imagery+in+the+creation+of+false+childhood+memories.">The role mental imagery in the creation of false childhood memories.</a> Journal of Memory and Language. 35 (2), 101-117 (1996).</li><li>Bays, R. B., Zabrucky, K. M., Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagery+induction+processes+differentially+impact+imagination+inflation.">Imagery induction processes differentially impact imagination inflation.</a> Imagination, Cognition, and Personality. 35 (1), 5-25 (2015).</li><li>Wade, K. A., Garry, M., Read, J. D., Lindsay, D. S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+picture+is+worth+a+thousand+lies:+Using+false+photographs+to+create+false+childhood+memories.">A picture is worth a thousand lies: Using false photographs to create false childhood memories.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 9 (3), 597-603 (2002).</li><li>Foley, M. A., Wozniak, K. H., Gillum, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+false+memory+inductions:+investigating+the+role+of+process,+content+and+source+of+imaginations.">Imagination and false memory inductions: investigating the role of process, content and source of imaginations.</a> Applied Cognitive Psychology. 20 (9), 1119 (2006).</li><li>McDermott, K. B., Watson, J. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+rise+and+fall+of+false+recall:+The+impact+of+presentation+duration.">The rise and fall of false recall: The impact of presentation duration.</a> Journal of Memory and Language. 45 (1), 160-176 (2001).</li><li>Robin, F., Mah&#233;, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Effects+of+image+and+verbal+generation+on+false+memory.">Effects of image and verbal generation on false memory.</a> Imagination, Cognition and Personality. 35 (1), 26-46 (2015).</li></ol>

The authors have nothing to disclose.

The protocol employed in this study modified a widely used word list procedure, the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm, to assess the effects of associative processing with and without imagery instructions on false memories in a classroom-based procedure. The expansion to include the variables of list association type, test type, and imagery instruction implemented here afforded the ability to analyze how each of these complex factors influenced a learning context independently, as well as how they interacted, provi...

Memory is malleable and fallible, and these days people realize the limitations of their own memory system. But how do memory errors arise? What mechanisms are responsible for errors in memory retrieval? We modified a widely used and highly cited laboratory-based procedure called the Deese Roediger McDermott paradigm (DRM)1,2 to investigate the influence of different variables on memory errors. In traditional DRM procedures, participants are asked to learn lists of semantically related words (e.g., table, couch, desk, lamp, pillow, stool, bench, rocker). When later asked to recall and/or recognize the words from the lists, participants often report seeing words that were semantically related to the lists but not actually studied (e.g., chair). False memories for these words, referred to as critical lures, can occur 55% - 80% of the time in standard procedures2,3.
The Activation Monitoring Framework is often cited as a theoretical basis for memory errors that arise from the DRM paradigm. Specifically, DRM false memories are attributed to the dual processes of activation (i.e., the tendency for pieces of information currently active in working memory to &#34;spread&#34; and also activate other, related pieces of information) and monitoring (i.e., assessing the accuracy and/or source of something being remembered)5,6. The process of studying semantically related DRM lists causes activation to spread from the list words to the critical lure and thus activates the critical lure in working memory. The result is a false memory that may not be accurately monitored during later tasks.
The three-phase testing procedure inherent to the DRM paradigm allows cognitive psychologists to manipulate a number of variables during the process of encoding (study of the list items), retention (storage of the list items while completing a distractor task to disrupt working memory), or retrieval (a memory test), to better understand the specific processes that contribute to memory errors. Our procedure expands use of traditional DRM procedures to directly compare memory error rates for different types of content during encoding (e.g., semantically related versus phonologically related)9, test type during retrieval (e.g., a recall task versus a recognition task)10 and, perhaps most notably, imagery encoding processes during list study11,12,13,14.
Our primary interest in developing this protocol was to better understand possible effects of imagery on recall and recognition, particularly whether the effects of creating mental images of the list words during encoding (e.g., imagining them) would vary according to whether the list words were related to the critical lure according to sound (i.e., phonologically) or meaning (i.e., semantically). For instance, for the phonological list log, hog, dock, bog, fog, doll, frog, jog, and dot, the critical lure is dog. For the semantic list mug, saucer, tea, coaster, lid, coffee, straw, and soup, the critical lure is cup. We were interested in whether imaging the list words affected the associative processing for those lists differently. While traditional DRM word lists contain 12-15 semantically related list words2, our procedure employed 8-item word lists. These lists were modified from 16-item lists previously developed to investigate the converging effects of phonological and semantic word associations on false memories9. In order to adapt typical DRM procedures to include imagery instructions, we shortened the word lists by selecting the 8 words from each list that were easiest to create mental images of. This allowed for the elimination of less concrete words (e.g., pun, worst) that were hard to imagine. Additionally, we modified a computer-based word list presentation utilized in previous research15 to standardize the presentation of materials and also developed paper/pencil recall and recognition measures to more appropriately suit classroom environments.
Our results did not suggest an interaction between list association type and imagery procedures, but they did demonstrate the significant main effects of imagery and list type14. We pursued this line of inquiry because of the robust literature of imagination inflation effects suggesting enhanced feelings of belief and memory in past childhood events that are repeatedly imagined16,17,18. However, recently researchers suggest that perhaps not all imagery is created equal and that the nature of imagery instructions mediates the effects on false memory rates19. One possible limitation to the work assessing imagination inflation effects is inherent in the procedure itself. That is, participants are asked to provide Likert scale ratings of their confidence or belief in experiencing certain events in childhood, and following imagination of those events, ratings are provided a second time to assess changes (specifically increases) in those ratings. One possible problem with this procedure is a lack of control over the veracity of experiences that participants must identify with confidence ratings both prior to and after the imagery phase. In some studies, researchers consult family members for corroboration20; however, a majority of the research examining imagination inflation relies solely on the word of the participant.
DRM procedures offer methodological advantages over other memory paradigms, including imagination inflation procedures, because researchers maintain control over the content being activated in working memory through the design of the lists. Specifically, researchers select the list items according to their associative strength to the critical lure and can easily measure when a participant commits the targeted memory error (e.g., chair was not on the studied list but was recalled at test). This content control provides insight into processes that drive associative memory errors, affording researchers the opportunity to explore other potentially important factors driving false memory errors, such as the construction of visual images during list encoding21 or even elaborating on the list items to generate complex event narratives11.
This protocol employs a presentation administration of materials and a paper and pencil format of data collection that allows researchers to collect participant data in large groups (e.g., classrooms), while systematically varying variables. The accessibility and experimental control offered by this protocol provides an opportunity to teach students about memory processes with an in-class demonstration while reliably collecting data. Compared to laboratory-based DRM procedures, this context makes results more applicable to classroom learning, thus informing both cognitive science and educational psychology. In addition, this protocol provides optional modifications that can be utilized to remove the usage of imagery instructions or varying list types, thereby offering a construction-kit type approach that allows for more personalized use.

<table><tbody><tr><td>No Materials Applicable</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

using a classroom-based deese roediger mcdermott paradigm to assess the effects of imagery on false memories

Associated word list procedures can elicit false memories in predictable ways by inducing associative processing, thus making it harder to monitor the accuracy of memories. The purpose of the method presented here was to induce false memories using lists of either semantically or phonologically related words and to assess the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. To do this, we used a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm. We adapted word lists from previous DRM studies to suit imagery procedures and created an automated presentation to present the word lists in classroom settings. We then recruited undergraduate classes and instructed some of the classes to create mental images of the list words as they were being presented, while instructing the other classes to simply remember the words. The automated presentation presented word lists to participants, one word at a time, alternating between phonologically and semantically related lists. Participants used paper-pencil recall packets to immediately recall list items, complete a distractor activity, and take a subsequent final recognition test. Often, participants immediately recalled and later recognized words that were related to the list items but were not actually presented; these are known as critical lures and indicate a false memory. The protocol detailed here describes a four-step procedure - list presentation, immediate recall, distractor phase, and final recognition - that can assess the effects of list type and imagery instruction within the DRM paradigm on memory. The automated nature of the list presentation provides the ability to systematically vary variables of interest, and the paper and pencil method of data collection affords an easily accessible method for collecting data in classroom settings. The protocol also offers options to modify the procedure to a more traditional DRM paradigm without imagery and/or list type manipulations. The use of this protocol can provide results relevant to both classroom learning and cognitive science principles.

Effects of DRM Procedures on False Memories: Standard DRM Instructions without Imagery 
To illustrate standard DRM procedures&#39; ability to induce false memories, we analyzed rates of falsely remembering non-list words during recall and recognition. Table 1 reports proportions for the different types of false remembering that occurred during recall and recognition. During immediate recall, participants recalled unpresented words on 20% of the lists...

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories at JoVE.com

Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

The method presented here induced false memories using lists of related words and also assessed the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. This protocol details a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm.

Associated word list procedures can elicit false memories in predictable ways by inducing associative processing, thus making it harder to monitor the ...

using-classroom-based-deese-roediger-mcdermott-paradigm-to-assess

Research

JoVE Journal

Behavior

9.6K Views.  Mercer University. The method presented here induced false memories using lists of related words and also assessed the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. This protocol details a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm.

Video: Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

Examining the Characteristics of Episodic Memory using Event-related Potentials in Patients with Alzheimer's Disease

Our laboratory uses event-related EEG potentials (ERPs) to understand and support behavioral investigations of episodic memory in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Whereas behavioral data inform us about the patients' performance, ERPs allow us to record discrete changes in brain activity. Further, ERPs can give us insight into the onset, duration, and interaction of independent cognitive processes associated with memory retrieval. In patient populations, these types of studies are used to examine which aspects of memory are impaired and which remain relatively intact compared to a control population. The methodology for collecting ERP data from a vulnerable patient population while these participants perform a recognition memory task is reviewed. This protocol includes participant preparation, quality assurance, data acquisition, and data analysis. In addition to basic setup and acquisition, we will also demonstrate localization techniques to obtain greater spatial resolution and source localization using high-density (128 channel) electrode arrays.

The methodology for collecting high-density event-related potential data while patients with Alzheimer's disease perform a recognition memory task is reviewed. This protocol will include subject preparation, quality assurance, data acquisition, and data analysis.

Our laboratory uses event-related EEG potentials (ERPs) to understand and support behavioral investigations of episodic memory in patients with amnestic ...

Medicine

Brain Imaging Investigation of the Neural Correlates of Emotional Autobiographical Recollection

Recollection of emotional autobiographical memories (AMs) is important to healthy cognitive and affective functioning 1 - remembering positive AMs is associated with increased personal well-being and self-esteem 2, whereas remembering and ruminating on negative AMs may lead to affective disorders 3. Although significant progress has been made in understanding the brain mechanisms underlying AM retrieval in general (reviewed in 4, 5), less is known about the effect of emotion on the subjective re-experience of AMs and the associated neural correlates. This is in part due to the fact that, unlike the investigations of the emotion effect on memory for laboratory-based microevents (reviewed in 6, 7-9), often times AM studies do not have a clear focus on the emotional aspects of remembering personal events (but see 10). Here, we present a protocol that allows investigation of the neural correlates of recollecting emotional AMs using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Cues for these memories are collected prior to scanning by means of an autobiographical memory questionnaire (AMQ), therefore allowing for proper selection of emotional AMs based on their phenomenological properties (i.e., intensity, vividness, personal significance). This protocol can be used in healthy and clinical populations alike.

We present a protocol that allows investigation of the neural correlates of recollecting emotional autobiographical memories, using functional magnetic resonance imaging. This protocol can be used with both healthy and clinical participants.

Recollection of emotional autobiographical memories (AMs) is important to healthy cognitive and affective functioning 1 - remembering positive AMs is ...

Neuroscience

Brain Imaging Investigation of the Memory-Enhancing Effect of Emotion

Emotional events tend to be better remembered than non-emotional events1,2. One goal of cognitive and affective neuroscientists is 
to understand the neural mechanisms underlying this enhancing effect of emotion on memory. A method that has proven particularly influential in the 
investigation of the memory-enhancing effect of emotion is the so-called subsequent memory paradigm (SMP). This method was originally used to investigate the 
neural correlates of non-emotional memories3, and more recently we and others also applied it successfully to studies of emotional memory (reviewed in4, 5-7). 
Here, we describe a protocol that allows investigation of the neural correlates of the memory-enhancing effect of emotion using the SMP in conjunction with 
event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). An important feature of the SMP is that it allows separation of brain activity specifically 
associated with memory from more general activity associated with perception. Moreover, in the context of investigating the impact of emotional stimuli, 
SMP allows identification of brain regions whose activity is susceptible to emotional modulation of both general/perceptual and memory-specific processing. 
This protocol can be used in healthy subjects8-15, as well as in clinical patients where there are alterations in the neural correlates of emotion perception 
and biases in remembering emotional events, such as those suffering from depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)16, 17.

We present a protocol that uses functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the neural correlates of the memory-enhancing effect of emotion. This protocol allows identification of brain activity specifically linked to memory-related processing, contrary to more general perceptual processing, and can be used with healthy and clinical populations.

Emotional events tend to be better remembered than non-emotional events1,2. One goal of cognitive and affective neuroscientists is 
to understand the ...

Examining Recall Memory in Infancy and Early Childhood Using the Elicited Imitation Paradigm

The ability to recall the past allows us to report on details of previous experiences, from the everyday to the significant. Because recall memory is commonly assessed using verbal report paradigms in adults, studying the development of this ability in preverbal infants and children proved challenging. Over the past 30 years, researchers have developed a non-verbal means of assessing recall memory known as the elicited or deferred imitation paradigm. In one variant of the procedure, participants are presented with novel three-dimensional stimuli for a brief baseline period before a researcher demonstrates a series of actions that culminate in an end- or goal-state. The participant is allowed to imitate the demonstrated actions immediately, after a delay, or both. Recall performance is then compared to baseline or to performance on novel control sequences presented at the same session; memory can be assessed for the individual target actions and the order in which they were completed. This procedure is an accepted analogue to the verbal report techniques used with adults, and it has served to establish a solid foundation of the nature of recall memory in infancy and early childhood. In addition, the elicited or deferred imitation procedure has been modified and adapted to answer questions relevant to other aspects of cognitive functioning. The broad utility and application of imitation paradigms is discussed, along with limitations of the approach and directions for future research.

The elicited imitation procedure was established to examine the development of recall memory in infancy and early childhood. This procedure has been widely used to establish a solid foundation of the nature of recall memory in infancy and early childhood.

The ability to recall the past allows us to report on details of previous experiences, from the everyday to the significant. Because recall memory is ...

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

A considerable amount of research has evaluated children's lie-telling behaviors and skills1-2; however, limitations with the tasks used for eliciting false testimonies and interviewing children have restricted the generalizability of the findings. The primary aim of the current study is to provide an easy-to-administer and ecologically valid method for measuring the veracity and quality of school-aged children's (ages 6-11) testimonies when they are asked to provide different types of true and false reports. Moreover, the methodology enables researchers to examine the social and developmental factors that could influence the credibility of a child's testimony. In the current study, children will witness a theft, and are then asked to either falsely deny the transgression, falsely accuse a researcher of the theft, or tell the truth. Afterwards, children are to be interviewed by a second researcher using a thorough and ecologically valid interview protocol that requires children to provide closed-ended and free-recall responses about the events with the instigator (E1). Coders then evaluate the length and number of theft-related details the children give throughout the interview, as well as their ability to maintain their true and false reports. The representative results indicate that the truth and lie-telling conditions elicit the intended behaviors from the children. The open-ended interview questions encouraged children to provide free-recall information about their experiences with E1. Moreover, findings from the closed-ended questions suggest that children are significantly better at maintaining their lies with age, and when producing a false denial compared to a false accusation. Results from the current study can be used to develop a greater understanding of the characteristics of children's true and false testimonies about crime, which can potentially benefit law enforcement, legal staff and professionals who interview children.

The current methodology is designed to provide an ecologically relevant approach for measuring the veracity, length and quality of children's true and false testimonies. Implications of the current methodology for future research and professionals who interview children will also be discussed.

A considerable amount of research has evaluated children's lie-telling behaviors and skills1-2; however, limitations with the tasks used for eliciting ...

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

The Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task is a false memory paradigm in which subjects are presented with lists of semantically related words (e.g., nurse, hospital, etc.) at encoding. After a delay, subjects are asked to recall or recognize these words. In the recognition memory version of the task, subjects are asked whether they remember previously presented words, as well as related (but never presented) critical lure words (&#39;doctor&#39;). Typically, the critical word is recognized with high probability and confidence. This false memory effect has been robustly demonstrated across short (e.g., immediate, 20 min) and long (e.g., 1, 7, 60 d) delays between encoding and memory testing. A strength of using this task to study false memory is its simplicity and short duration. If encoding and retrieval components of the task occur in the same session, the entire task can take as little as 2 - 30 min. However, although the DRM task is widely considered a &#39;false memory&#39; paradigm, some researchers consider DRM illusions to be based on the activation of semantic memory networks in the brain, and argue that such semantic gist-based false memory errors may actually be useful in some scenarios (e.g., remembering the forest for the trees; remembering that a word list was about &#34;doctors&#34;, even though the actual word &#34;doctor&#34; was never presented for study). Remembering the gist of experience (instead of or along with individual details) is arguably an adaptive process and this task has provided a great deal of knowledge about the constructive, adaptive nature of memory. Therefore, researchers should use caution when discussing the overall reach and implications of their experiments when using this task to study &#39;false memory&#39;, as DRM memory errors may not adequately reflect false memories in the real world, such as false memory in eyewitness testimony, or false memories of sexual abuse.

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Here we present the Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task, a tool to study false memories in the laboratory. Subjects study lists of semantically related words (e.g.,&#160;nurse, sick, etc.), and later falsely remember an unstudied word (doctor) that represents the gist, or theme, of the word list.

The Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task is a false memory paradigm in which subjects are presented with lists of semantically related words ...

Anterograde Amnesia

Source: Laboratories of Jonas T. Kaplan and Sarah I. Gimbel&#8212;University of Southern California
Anterograde amnesia is the loss of the ability to form new memories. This can be distinguished from retrograde amnesia, which is the loss of old memories. Anterograde amnesia can result from damage to structures in the brain that are involved in the formation of new memories. Patients who have damage to the structures of the medial temporal lobe, including the hippocampus, amygdala, and the surrounding cortices, often have severe deficits in the formation of certain kinds of memories. These cases can be informative as to how memory is organized in the brain, and how different systems support different kinds of memories. 
In this video, we will test a patient with medial temporal lobe damage on a series of memory tasks designed to distinguish between different forms of memory. First, we will test short-term or working memory, which is the process we use to keep information in mind temporarily. Next, we will test two different forms of long-term memory: explicit and implicit memory. Explicit memories are conscious and easy to verbalize. For example, memories of facts or episodes from our lives are explicit memories. We can easily tell someone what we ate for breakfast, or what city is the capital of France. Implicit memory involves knowledge we gain from experience but that is not easily expressible. For example, knowing how to do things, or becoming habituated to a stimulus are forms of implicit memory. 
These procedures are based in part on studies of the famous patient Henry Molaison, also known by his initials H.M., who had severe anterograde amnesia as a result of a surgery for intractable epilepsy in which parts of both temporal lobes were resected.1 We will perform a test of digit span, which measures short-term memory, a test of paired-associate learning, which measures explicit or declarative memory, and mirror-drawing, a test of implicit skill learning.2

Testing Short- and Long-term Memories in Patients with Brain Injuries

Source: Laboratories of Jonas T. Kaplan and Sarah I. Gimbel&#8212;University of Southern California
Anterograde amnesia is the loss of the ability to form ...

Education

JoVE Science Education

Psychology

Neuropsychology

Learning and Memory: The Remember-Know Task

Source: Laboratories of Jonas T. Kaplan and Sarah I. Gimbel&#8212;University of Southern California
Our experience of memory is varied and complex. Sometimes we remember events in vivid detail, while other times we may only have a vague sense of familiarity. Memory researchers have made a distinction between memories that are recollected versus those that are familiar. A recollected item is one that is not only remembered, but carries with it details of the time at which it was learned or encoded. Like a recollected item, a familiar item is also remembered, but is void of any details about the circumstances surrounding its encoding. Many studies of recollection and familiarity have focused on the medial temporal lobe (MTL), specifically the hippocampus, since its involvement in memory encoding, consolidation, and retrieval is well-known and well-studied.1-3
This video shows how to administer the Remember-Know task4 to compare brain activation in these two types of memory retrieval. In this context, remember is another term for recollection, while know refers to memories that are familiar but not explicitly recollected. In this version of the Remember-Know task, participants are exposed to a series of color images, and asked to remember what they see. Inside an fMRI scanner, they will be exposed to both images that were studied and to novel images, and they will make a "remember," "know," or "new" judgment about each image, indicating what kind of memory they have for that item. Following the scan, whole brain and hippocampal activity will be examined to determine differential activity related to recollection and familiarity. This study is based on a study performed by Gimbel and Brewer.5

The Remember-Know Task: Memory Recall and Brain Activation

Source: Laboratories of Jonas T. Kaplan and Sarah I. Gimbel&#8212;University of Southern California
Our experience of memory is varied and complex. ...

Incidental Encoding

Source: Laboratory of Jonathan Flombaum&#8212;Johns Hopkins University

Long-term memory is a critical feature of human cognition, and it has been a prominent focus of research in experimental psychology. Many paradigms designed to tap long-term memory rely on asking participants to learn or study content, then test memory about that content. This is a good approach if one wants to understand how memory supports educational achievement, for example, where explicit study is part of the process. But, in day-to-day life, people often form new memories&#8212;many of which last for a long time&#8212;incidentally. People do not remember what they read in a magazine, the moment a partner was met, or the plot of a favorite story because they try to. Somehow, a good deal of experience just gets encoded into memory as life goes by. To study this side of long-term memory, experimental psychologists use something called an incidental-encoding paradigm.
The paradigm is especially useful for investigating the kinds of experiences that tend to produce strong long-term memories. Researchers think about experiences in terms of the kind of engagement they demand&#8212;personal, purely intellectual, deep, or shallow, for example. The incidental-encoding paradigm can be used to contrast long-term memory formation during different kinds of engagement by varying the cover task used to expose an individual to stimuli. A cover task is a task that a participant is asked to complete without knowing that memory for the stimuli in the task is tested later.
This video demonstrates standard procedures for using the incidental-encoding paradigm and two different cover tasks to investigate long-term memory when explicit study of a stimulus is not demanded.

Incidental Encoding: Investigating Implicit Long-term Memory

Source: Laboratory of Jonathan Flombaum&#8212;Johns Hopkins University

Long-term memory is a critical feature of human cognition, and it has been a ...

Cognitive Psychology

Memory Development: Demonstrating How Repeated Questioning Leads to False Memories

Source: Laboratories of Judith Danovitch and Nicholaus Noles&#8212;University of Louisville
A person is defined as a unique individual based on the people and events they encounter in their lives. Thus, creating, storing, and recalling memories are essential elements of the human experience. However, memory, as adults experience it, takes time to develop. Although young children can learn facts and remember details of their lives from moment-to-moment and day-to-day, they do not create autobiographical memories or detailed memories of events that happen in their lives until age 3 or older.
Even after age 3, children&#8217;s memories differ from those of adults in important ways. Children are less effective at evaluating their own memories than adults, which makes it difficult for them to determine, for example, whether or not their memories are accurate. False memories are a problem for both children and adults, as it is quite easy to create a false memory with a poorly-worded question or a story repeated over and over. However, young children are more susceptible to creating false memories than either older children or adults.
This video demonstrates children&#8217;s vulnerability to false memories using a method developed by Steven Ceci and his collaborators.1-2

Demonstrating How Repeated Questioning Leads to False Memories

Source: Laboratories of Judith Danovitch and Nicholaus Noles&#8212;University of Louisville
A person is defined as a unique individual based on the people ...