Differences in Experienced Memory Qualities between Factual and Fictional Events

Author:

Gander Pierre1ORCID,Lowe Robert1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg https://dx.doi.org/3570 Göteborg Sweden

Abstract

Abstract The experienced qualities of memories of factual and fictional events have been little researched previously. The few studies that exist find no or few differences. However, one reason to expect differences in memory qualities is that processing of fact and fiction seem to involve activation of different brain areas. The present study expands earlier research by including a wider range of memory qualities, using positive and negative events, and three time-points: immediately after, after a ten-minute delay and after a five-week delay. Participants (N = 52) read four short stories in English, labelled either fact or fiction, and rated memory qualities on 7-point scales. Results show no differences; however, an interaction was found between fictionality and story emotional valence, in that memories of negative fictional stories are rated as more clear. The higher clarity can be explained by previous findings that negative events from stories are in general remembered in more detail, in combination with the idea that fiction entails simulation to a higher degree than fact. The conclusion is that although a difference in memory qualities between fact and fiction was found in one case, memory qualities seem not to play an operative role when the memory system distinguishes fact from fiction.

Publisher

Brill

Subject

Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,Cultural Studies,Social Psychology

Reference40 articles.

1. Meeting George Bush versus meeting Cinderella: the neural response when telling apart what is real from what is fictional in the context of our reality;Abraham, A.

2. Deception detection and reality monitoring: A new answer to an old question?;Alonso-Quecuty, M. L.

3. The power of emotional valence – from cognitive to affective processes in reading;Altmann, U.

4. Fact vs fiction: How paratextual information shapes our reading processes;Altmann, U.

5. Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time;Appel, M.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3