False memories and real epistemic problems revised.pdf (268.83 kB)
Download file

False memories and real epistemic problems

Download (268.83 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 08.11.2016, 12:25 by Steven D. Brown, P. Reavey
The dichotomy between ‘truth’ and ‘falsity’ in relation to memory is difficult to clearly sustain. The veridicality of memory is typically established by drawing on the local, normative procedures that operate in a given setting (e.g. legal, clinical, social). Since all procedures are strictly relative, all memories are technically either ‘relatively falsified’ or ‘relatively as-yet-unfalsified’. False Memory Studies claim to be able explain the production of false memories, but do not offer criterion to effectively differentiate populations of so-called ‘true’ and ‘false’ victims. The narrative of the discovery of the ‘false memories’ themselves is inconsistent and demonstrates a significant level of imagination inflation and suggestibility to dominant narratives in post-war Psychology. In attending to the setting-specificity of memory, researchers may wish to consider how their work impacts on the experience-ecologies to which they contribute.

History

Citation

Culture and Psychology, 2017, 23(2), pp. 171-185

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, ARTS AND HUMANITIES/School of Management

Version

AM (Accepted Manuscript)

Published in

Culture and Psychology

Publisher

SAGE Publications (UK and US)

issn

1354-067X

eissn

1461-7056

Acceptance date

01/10/2016

Copyright date

2017

Available date

17/06/2017

Publisher version

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354067X17695764

Language

en

Usage metrics

Categories

Keywords

Exports