Gallo D A, Roediger H L, McDermott K B
Department of Psychology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130, USA.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Sep;8(3):579-86. doi: 10.3758/bf03196194.
In the DRM (Deese/Roediger and McDermott) false memory paradigm, subjects studied lists of words associated with nonpresented critical words. They were tested in one of four instructional conditions. In a standard condition, subjects were not warned about the DRM Effect. In three other conditions, they were told to avoid false recognition of critical words. One group was warned before study of the lists (affecting encoding and retrieval processes), and two groups were warned after study (affecting only retrieval processes). Replicating prior work, the warning before study considerably reduced false recognition. The warning after study also reduced false recognition, but only when critical items had never been studied; when critical items were studied in half the lists so that subjects had to monitor memory for their presence or absence, the warning after study had little effect on false recognition. Because warned subjects were trying to avoid false recognition, the high levels of false recognition in the latter condition cannot be due to strategically guessing that critical test items were studied. False memories in the DRM paradigm are not caused by such liberal criterion shifts.
在DRM（迪斯/罗迪格和麦克德莫特）错误记忆范式中，受试者学习与未呈现的关键单词相关的单词列表。他们在四种指导条件之一中接受测试。在标准条件下，受试者未被告知DRM效应。在其他三种条件下，他们被告知要避免对关键单词的错误识别。一组在学习列表之前得到警告（影响编码和检索过程），两组在学习之后得到警告（仅影响检索过程）。重复之前的研究，学习前的警告显著减少了错误识别。学习后的警告也减少了错误识别，但仅当关键项目从未被学习过时；当关键项目在一半的列表中被学习，以便受试者必须监控记忆中它们的存在或不存在时，学习后的警告对错误识别几乎没有影响。因为得到警告的受试者试图避免错误识别，所以在后一种情况下高水平的错误识别不可能是由于策略性猜测关键测试项目被学习过。DRM范式中的错误记忆不是由这种宽松的标准转变引起的。
