Skip to main content
. 2016 Apr 8;31(1):2–23. doi: 10.1002/acp.3220

Table 4.

Studies implanting ‘Corroborated’ false childhood memories of entirely new events in adults

Authors Participants False childhood event (additional relevant B/S conditions) Imagery instruction % with any false recollective experiencea % with false memories partially meeting full criteria % with full false memories Mean self‐report recollection/belief ratings
Loftus and Pickrell (1995) 24 adults (age 18–53 years) Lost in mall No 25%
Hyman et al. (1995) Study 1 20 college students 1 selected from birthday with pizza/clown; hospital overnight stay No 20%
Hyman et al. (1995) Study 2 51 college students 1 selected from spilt punchbowl at wedding; fire sprinkler in shop; left in car No 26% 12%
Hyman and Pentland (1996) 65 college students spilt punchbowl at wedding (think about event versus guided imagery) Yes (1 condition) 12% think 36% imagine 9% think 25% imagine Memory confidence (1–7) rangeb 4.00–3.00 some recall 1.32–1.10 no recall
Pezdek et al. (1997) Study 1 51 college students Religious event (plausible versus implausible event) No 6% implausible 22% plausible
Pezdek et al. (1997) Study 2 20 teens and young adults Lost in mall; received enema No 0% enema 15% mall
Hyman and Billings (1998) 66 college students Spilt punchbowl at wedding Yes 27% 15% Memory confidence (1–5) 2.60 clear – 2.25 partial – 1.40 no recall
Porter et al. (1999) 77 college students 1 selected from lost; harmed; attacked; serious accident; serious medical procedure Yes 56% 26%
Heaps and Nash (2001) 63 college students 1 selected from LEIc items Yes 37%
Wade et al. (2002) 20 college students Hot air balloon ride with doctored photo Yes 50% 20% Belief in event [1 (0%) – 7 (100%)] 67% clear – 25% partial – 0% no recall
Lindsay et al. (2004) 45 college students Put Slime in teacher's desk (sight versus no sight of school class photo) Yes 46% no photo 23% no photo Memory extent (1–7) 1.91 no photo 2.83 photo Belief in event (1–7) 2.36 no photo 3.59 photo
78% photo 65% photo
Garry and Wade (2005) 44 young adults Hot air balloon ride (false narrative versus doctored photo) Yes 50% photo 82% narrative 29% photod 41% narratived Know – remember (1–7) 1.36 photo 1.64 narrative Memory confidence (1–7) 2.14 photo 2.32 narrative
Ost et al. (2005) 31 college students 1 selected from hospital; lost; eventful holiday or birthday; wedding; contest; serious accident to other No 23% 3% Memory confidence (1–7) 2.87
French et al. (2006) 58 young adults Hot air balloon ride False narratives /doctored photos alternated No 24% 5%
Desjardins and Scoboria (2007) 44 college students Put Slime in teacher's desk (presence versus absence of (i) specific and (ii) self‐relevant details in false memory narrative) Yes 68% self‐relevant 36% no self‐relevant 30% rangeb, d 55–9% Memory extent (1–8) rangeb 2.82–1.27 Belief in event (1–8) rangeb 5.18–3.36
Qin et al. (2008) Study 1 33 college students 1 selected from birthday at McDonalds; hospital for injury Yes (1 condition) 26% rangeb, e 36–16% 10% rangeb, e 14–7%
86 adults (Think about versus visualise event; false memory warning versus no warning)
Strange et al. (2008) 105 young adults Hot air balloon ride (event at age 2 years versus age 10 years) No 38% age 2 years 19% age 10 years 13% age 2 years 7% age 10 years Know – remember (1–7) 2.10 age 2 years, 2.20 age 10 years
Wade et al. (2010) 53 young adults Hot air balloon ride with doctored photo (Photo first versus narrative first) Yes 41% photo firstd 10% photo firstd
67% narrative firstd 23% narrative firstd
Short and Bodner (2011) 34 college students 1 selected from ‘plausible’ false event that was another subject's true event Yes 41% 21%
Hessen‐Kayfitz and Scoboria (2012) 82 college students Hot air balloon ride with doctored photo (presence versus absence of (i) self‐relevant and (ii) familiar details in photo) Yes 34% rangeb 47–24% 13% rangeb 19–5% Know – remember (1–7) range 1.74–1.15 Memory confidence (1–7) rangeb 2.17–1.10
Otgaar et al. (2013) Study 1 89 college students Hot air balloon ride Yes 36% (% of participants) Recollection 20% Belief 20%
Shaw and Porter (2015) 60 college students 1 selected from 3 criminal acts or 3 non‐criminal events Yes 93% 73% rangeb 77–70% Memory confidence (1–7) rangeb 2.86–1

Cells left blank where relevant data not reported.

a

Potentially includes clear memories, partial/vague/uncertain memories and speculations, images without memories.

b

Means or percentages vary according to condition.

c

LEI = Life Events Inventory, Garry et al., 1996.

d

Estimated from published figures.

e

Author communication.