🧠 RECONSTRUCTIVE MEMORY

📌Definition Table

Term	Definition
Memory reconstruction	The process of recalling information by building it again from stored knowledge, influenced by schemas and expectations.
Reconstructive memory	The idea that memory is not a perfect recording but an active reconstruction that can be distorted by schemas, leading to inaccuracies.
Misleading information	Post-event information that changes or distorts one’s memory of an event.
Eyewitness testimony	Legal term for evidence given by people who witnessed an event — often unreliable due to memory reconstruction.
Post-event information	New data introduced after an event that alters the memory of it.
Confabulation	Filling in memory gaps with false details unknowingly.
Schema	Mental frameworks of prior knowledge that help organize and interpret new information.

📌Core Concepts

Human memory is not a passive storage system; it is reconstructive, meaning recall involves piecing together information using existing schemas.
This makes memory prone to distortion, particularly through misleading questions, emotional interference, or post-event exposure.

📌Key Studies

📄 Loftus & Palmer (1974) – Eyewitness Testimony and Leading Questions

Aim: To investigate how wording of questions influences memory reconstruction.
Procedure:

• Participants watched car crash videos and answered questions about speed using verbs like smashed, hit, bumped, collided, contacted.
  Findings:
• Average speed estimates varied by verb (smashed = 40.8 mph, contacted = 31.8 mph).
• “Smashed” group was more likely to falsely recall broken glass.
  Conclusion:
• Memory is reconstructive and can be influenced by leading questions.

Evaluation:
✅ Controlled experiment with clear IV manipulation.
⚠️ Lacks ecological validity — artificial car crashes.
✅ Strong implications for eyewitness testimony reliability.

---

📄 Loftus & Pickrell (1995) – Lost in the Mall Study

Aim: To determine if false memories can be implanted.
Procedure:

• Participants received 4 childhood event descriptions (3 true, 1 false about being lost in a mall).
• Interviewed about their memories.
  Findings:
• 25% “remembered” the false event.
  Conclusion:
• False memories can be created through suggestion and familiarity.

Evaluation:
✅ Ethical debriefing, demonstrates reconstructive nature of memory.
⚠️ Low ecological validity (minor event).
⚠️ Potential emotional discomfort.

---

📄 Yuille & Cutshall (1986) – Real-Life EWT Study

Aim: To test reliability of memory in a real crime.
Procedure:

• Interviewed witnesses of a real armed robbery in Vancouver.
• Compared responses with police reports.
  Findings:
• Witness accounts were accurate even after months.
  Conclusion:
• Memory for stressful real-life events can be reliable.

Evaluation:
✅ High ecological validity.
✅ Contradicts lab-based findings like Loftus & Palmer.
⚠️ Difficult to replicate due to ethical limits.

---

💬 Evaluation of Reconstructive Memory Theory

Strengths	Limitations
Supported by strong experimental evidence (Loftus & Palmer).	Artificial tasks reduce ecological validity.
Explains EWT inaccuracy and real-world legal implications.	Overemphasizes unreliability — ignores consistent memory under stress.
Integrates schema theory with memory models.	Lab experiments lack emotional realism.
Supported by biological evidence of hippocampal involvement in memory reconstruction.	Cultural and individual differences not accounted for.