Development And Validation Of A Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) - Study 2 - Info and Reading Options

The Internet Archive:

Many people report subjective awareness of the limitations of their own memory ability and capacities (Beaudoin & Desrichard, 2011; Van den Hout & Kindt, 2003). In some such instances, people indicate not only that they find themselves forgetful or unable to absorb new information, but also that they are often doubtful that the things they do remember are accurate or reliable. In other words, they have ‘memory distrust’. Prior research has attempted to study how individual differences in people’s beliefs about their susceptibility to memory errors are related to their objective susceptibility to such errors. For example, Van Bergen et al. (2010) reported that people who distrusted their own memories – as assessed via scores on the Squire Subjective Memory Questionnaire (SSMQ) – were significantly more likely than a ‘memory trusting’ group to accept misinformation about a film they had watched. In more serious contexts, researchers such as Gudjonsson et al. (2014) have proposed that memory distrust can play a key role in cases whereby people confess to crimes that they did not commit. In some such cases, it is argued, people who come to distrust their own memories can also come to judge that they may not remember committing ‘their’ supposed crimes. In short, it is important to understand memory distrust as a memory phenomenon that has potentially serious consequences. However, the main existing measure of memory distrust – the SSMQ – is limited insofar that it comprises items that largely focus upon subjective susceptibility to memory omission errors: forgetting or inadequate encoding. In contrast, this measure does not explore people’s subjective susceptibility to memory commission errors, such as false memories and source monitoring failures. The latter, we argue, are more representative of what the memory distrust construct entails. And yet there is good reason to believe that beliefs about memory omission errors and commission errors are imperfectly related. To address this issue, we have developed the Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) and submitted this instrument to initial tests of factorial and content validity. In Study 1 (N = 403), exploratory factor analysis suggested that the most adequate factorial structure was of one single factor containing all 20 MDS items. This single factor was denominated Memory Distrust and presented adequate internal consistency, and meaningful relationships with other memory self-rating measures (i.e., SSMQ; Cognitive Failures Questionnaire; Gudjonsson Compliance Questionnaire). A follow-up study (N = 119) also showed good evidence of test-retest reliability for the MDS after 3 to 4 week delay. The current project aims to further test the factorial structure of the MDS by means of confirmatory factor analysis in an independent sample. Additionally, the predictive validity of the MDS will be tested using a behavioural measure related to memory distrust (i.e., Scoboria’s nonbelieved memories task; Scoboria & Talarico, 2013).

Search for “Development And Validation Of A Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) - Study 2” downloads:

Visit our Downloads Search page to see if downloads are available.

Find “Development And Validation Of A Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) - Study 2” in Libraries Near You:

Read or borrow “Development And Validation Of A Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) - Study 2” from your local library.

• The WorldCat Libraries Catalog: Find a copy of “Development And Validation Of A Memory Distrust Scale (MDS) - Study 2” at a library near you.