A disturbing study on the power of persuasion and gaslighting.
I wasn't able to download the full PDF from PNAS, it just redirects to the same page, but from news sources[1] I find two details interesting:
- The average age of participants was 23, meaning young adults that are likely easily influenced by their parents and figures of authority. I'd like to know how effective this technique is on older adults with memories outside of their childhood.
- 74% of participants rejected the memory a year after it was "implanted", so a quarter of participants presumably still kept believing the false memory happened. Ethical concerns aside, this doesn't seem very effective.
I'd also like to know their definition of "minimally" and "massively suggestive" techniques, as stress during interviews can produce wildly inaccurate results. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies have decades of practical research in this area[2].
So I'm not sure what this study proves besides reinforcing the malleability of the human mind under stressful situations and that witness accounts are worthless for proving that an event happened.
It paints a grim picture of the future when Neuralink-like devices are available and researchers can tap directly into your brain. Certainly gives off Total Recall / Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vibes.
To clarify the headline and possibly save someone a click: the mechanism used to implant a memory in this experiment was “talking to the subject”. (Not that it necessarily makes the paper less interesting.)
Yes, and the mechanisms for removing the false memory were: 1) Making the subject aware that there were independant witnesses (family); 2) Reminding/making the subject aware that the memory may have been created during the interview.
I wasn't able to download the full PDF from PNAS, it just redirects to the same page, but from news sources[1] I find two details interesting:
- The average age of participants was 23, meaning young adults that are likely easily influenced by their parents and figures of authority. I'd like to know how effective this technique is on older adults with memories outside of their childhood.
- 74% of participants rejected the memory a year after it was "implanted", so a quarter of participants presumably still kept believing the false memory happened. Ethical concerns aside, this doesn't seem very effective.
I'd also like to know their definition of "minimally" and "massively suggestive" techniques, as stress during interviews can produce wildly inaccurate results. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies have decades of practical research in this area[2].
So I'm not sure what this study proves besides reinforcing the malleability of the human mind under stressful situations and that witness accounts are worthless for proving that an event happened.
It paints a grim picture of the future when Neuralink-like devices are available and researchers can tap directly into your brain. Certainly gives off Total Recall / Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind vibes.
[1]: https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/30287/20210324/false-m...
[2]: https://leb.fbi.gov/articles/featured-articles/current-state...