The study is interested in determining when children memories can be influenced by suggestion leading to the implantation of a false memory.

Hypothesize that the ability for false memories to be implanted is mediated by at least two factors: 1) plausibility of the memory and 2) the amount of information the script for the memory contains. These two factors can feasibly deviate independently of one another but Pezdek suggests that in real life these factors correlate highly with one another.

Two cohorts were sampled in this study

Young Children (5 to 7 years of age)

Older Children (9 to 12 years of age)

Method

Either a parent or the experimenter read descriptions of four different events (2 true, 2 false) suggested to have occurred when the child was four years old.

The 2 false items:

1. A plausible event: Being lost in a shopping mall
2. An implausible event: Being given a rectal enema

Day1

Two true events were presented followed by the two false events. The presentation of the two false events in the third and forth positions was counterbalanced across participants.

Presentation of each true and false event was completed by the researcher or parent saying to the child "This is what I remember what do you remember?"

If a child did not volunteer any additional information the description of the event was read to the child again. Children were asked to think hard during the night about the four events.

Day2

Children were read summaries of the four events introduced the day before and asked to give any addition information they had thought of the night before. Confidence/vividness ratings 1 (I don’t remember this at all) – 4 (I recall this very clearly) were taken for the memories produced for the four events. Next, participants were told that one of the events was false/not true and asked which one they thought was the false event. Then the children were debriefed.

Results

Events were considered not remembered if a child said that they could not remember the event, made no verbal response to the experimenters questions about the event, provided only information that was redundant with that provided by the experimenter (?), or provided irrelevant information.
 

	Children 5 to 7 Years (n = 19)	Children 9 to 12 Years (n = 20)	All Children (n = 39)
False events	7	7	14
Plausible but not implausible false events	0	1	1
Implausible but not Plausible false events	3	0	3
Both false events	3	0	3
Neither false event	9	12	21
True Events	4	6	10
One true event	4	6	10
Both true events	14	11	25
Neither true events	1	3	4

To determine that children are not recalling a similar event idea units were analyzed. True events differ from false events on the number of idea units.
 

Recalled Event Type	Mean Number of Idea Units Recalled
True events	4.86* (3.07)
False events	3.06* (1.95)
(n = 18)
True events	5.06* (3.04)
Plausible false event	3.24* (1.95)
(n = 17)
True events	3.00 (1.08)
Implausible false event	1.75 (.50)
(n = 4)
Plausible false event	3.00 (0)
Implausible false event	1.67 (.58)
(n = 3)

When asked to pick the one event that the researcher or parent lied to the children about, children were found to be far more likely to select the implausible false memory.