We send special thanks Dr. Mary Ann Foley and Dr. Karen Zabrucky for collaborative work on research projects informing our methodology in this paper.

All methods described here have been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Georgia State University.
1. Material Preparation
<ol>
	<li>Using the word lists attached in the supplemental materials, create four separate presentations: Imagery A, Imagery B, Non-imagery A, and Non-imagery B. Ensure that all four presentations are void of templates or designs, with white backgrounds and black font. The two list orders, A and B, serve to balance any effects of list order or fatigue. The two imagery versions serve to assess the effects of imagery instructions on memory.
	<ol>
		<li>Begin each presentation with a content slide titled, &#34;Instructions&#34;. In the body of the instructions slide, include the relevant instructions listed below in 24+ point font according to whether the presentation is designated as imagery or non-imagery.
		<ol>
			<li>Include these instructions for Imagery A and Imagery B presentations: &#34;I will present words from a list, one at a time, on the projector. As each word is presented, please create a mental image of that word in your mind. Please do not mark on the packet while the list is being presented. When each list is finished, the projector will indicate, &#34;RECALL&#34;, and you will write down the words you remember from the list in the packet provided. Try to use the images you created to help you recall the words. After you have written down all the words that you can remember, please indicate overall how easy it was for you to create mental images for that list. You will be given 45 seconds to recall the list and rate the ease of creating images, and then we will move on to the next list. When we do so, please flip to the next page in the packet. It is important that you do not revisit any old lists once we have moved on. There will be 11 lists in total, the first being a practice list. After all the lists have been presented, you will be asked to complete a word search task.&#34;</li>
			<li>Include these instructions for Non-imagery A and Non-imagery B presentations: &#34;I will present words from a list, one at a time, on the projector. Pay attention to the words on the projector. Please do not mark on your packet as the words are being presented. When each list is finished, the projector will indicate &#34;RECALL&#34;, and you will write down the words you remember from the list in the packet provided. You will be given 45 seconds to recall as many words from the list as you can, then we will move on to the next list. When we do so, please flip to the next page in the packet. It is important that you do not revisit any old lists once we have moved on. There will be 11 lists in total, the first being a practice list. After all the lists have been presented, you will be asked to complete a word search task.&#34;</li>
		</ol>
		</li>
		<li>Following the instructional slide, create timed slides to present lists and prompt recall. All text is center-aligned. List words are 72 point font, and all instructional cues are 44 pt. font.
		<ol>
			<li>Create slide 2 and include the text &#34;Prepare for the practice list&#34; centered vertically and horizontally on the slide in 44 point font.</li>
			<li>On slides 3-10, present the practice list words in order, one word per slide, centered horizontally and vertically, in lower case font. Designate a slide duration of 5 seconds by going under Transitions in the menu and selecting to advance the slide after 00:05.00.</li>
			<li>On slide 11, indicate the end of the practice list and the beginning of recall. Include &#34;End of Practice List&#34; in black font with &#34;RECALL&#34; double-spaced below it in red font. Designate a slide duration of 45 seconds.</li>
		</ol>
		</li>
		<li>After the practice list recall slide, create slides to present the test lists in the same manner. 
		&#8203;NOTE: The procedure for each list is 10 slides long. The first slide indicates &#34;Prepare for List X&#34;. The following 8 slides include the list words in order, each on a separate slide with 5 second durations. Following the list word slides, a recall slide with a designated duration of 45 seconds indicates &#34;End of List X&#34; in black font with &#34;RECALL&#34; double-spaced beneath it in red font. Adapt the &#34;X&#34; in the &#34;End of List X&#34; text to indicate the order of the lists in that particular presentation, not the order of the lists as they are listed in the appendix. For example, the 3rd list to occur in the presentation will read &#34;End of List 3&#34;.</li>
		<li>Ensure that the order of the lists in the slides varies according to the particular presentation . According to the numbered designations in the word lists attached to the supplemental materials, Imagery A and Non-Imagery A presentations present lists in ascending order: practice, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Imagery B and Non-imagery B presentations present lists in descending order: practice, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.</li>
		<li>After the recall slide for the last list, ensure that slide 112 includes the following text &#34;End of word lists. Turn to the next page in your packets and please take the next 7 minutes to work on the attached word searches.&#34; Designate a slide duration of 7 minutes.</li>
		<li>Create slide 113 to include &#34;End of word searching. One last activity&#34;. This slide has no designated duration. Create a final slide, 114, that includes a thank you.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Create two different versions of recall packets, imagery and non-imagery, in a word processor. Page 1 of both versions prompts participants to write down their name, gender, age, major, or any other demographic variables of interest. Page 13 of both versions includes a word search with dimensions of 20 x 20 letters or larger. Ensure that no list or practice words occur in the word search.
	<ol>
		<li>Ensure that pages 2-12 in the recall packets include repeated recall activity pages, which vary according to the version.</li>
		<li>Ensure that recall activity pages for the imagery version include the following instructions at the top of the page: &#34;Instructions: Create an image of each item in your head. Use the images you created to help you recall the words.&#34; Below that, the activity page includes &#34;Recall:&#34; with at least &#8531; of the page following it left blank. At the bottom of the page, include the following prompt: &#34;Overall, how easily did these images come to mind for this list? Circle one&#34;. Below the ease of imagery prompt, include the following options for participants to circle: &#34;0 - Not easy, 1 - Somewhat easy, 2 - Very easy&#34;.</li>
		<li>Ensure that recall activity pages for the non-imagery version include the following instructions at the top of the page: &#34;Instructions: Please recall and write down all the words you remember from the current list.&#34; Below that, the page indicates &#34;Recall:&#34; with no other prompts following.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Obtain the final recognition test from the supplementary materials and do not attach it to the recall packets. It is an individual page to be handed out separately. The final recognition test consists of 80 items total.
	<ol>
		<li>Of the 80 items, use 30 from the lists presented on the presentation slides at the start of the study. The 30 presented items chosen for the recognition memory test are the 1st, 3rd and 7th words from each of the 10 lists presented (15 semantic items and 15 phonological items).</li>
		<li>Include each of the 10 critical lures related to the 10 presented lists (5 semantic and 5 phonological) on the test.</li>
		<li>For the additional 40 items, use the DRM lists not presented to participants, including the 1st, 3rd and 7th items from each of 10 non-presented lists (15 semantic and 15 phonological items), as well as the associated critical lure (5 semantic and 5 phonological) for each of the 10 non-presented lists. The non-presented lists are located along with the presented lists in supplementary materials.</li>
		<li>Arrange the items on the recognition memory test such that one item from each of the 10 presented lists and 10 non-presented lists appears prior to any critical lures. List items are not thematically blocked on the memory test.</li>
		<li>Ensure that instructions on the recognition test prompt participants to indicate &#34;yes&#34; or &#34;no&#34; in writing as to whether each item appeared in any of the lists presented.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
2. Recruitment
<ol>
	<li>Recruit at least four face-to-face sections of the same, or very similar, undergraduate class. If possible, recruit non-psychology classes or introductory courses that have not learned about false memory paradigms.
	<ol>
		<li>Include all students who are enrolled in the recruited classes and have normal or corrected vision to participate.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Assign each class section to 1 of the 4 presentation types, distributing the number of classes assigned to each presentation type as evenly as possible and prioritizing even distribution across imagery and non-imagery presentation types.</li>
</ol>
3. Optional Modifications to Protocol
<ol>
	<li>If the effects of imagery instructions are not of interest, modify the protocol as follows to only include one set of instructions, one type of recall packet, and shorter slide durations.
	<ol>
		<li>Using the word lists attached in supplemental materials, create 2 separate presentations, versions A and B. Present the 10 study lists in ascending order following the practice list in the version A presentation (practice, 1, 2, 3, 4&#8230;), and present the lists in descending order following the practice list in the version B presentation (practice, 10, 9, 8, 7&#8230;).</li>
		<li>Include the non-imagery instructions from protocol item 1.1.1.2 on the first slide of both presentation versions.</li>
		<li>Modify the timed list presentation slides described in 1.1.2.2 to be 2 seconds long instead of 5 seconds. In other words, design the presentation so that each word is presented to participants for 2 seconds. Do not modify any other types of timed slides, like the recall slides (45 seconds) or word search side (7 minutes).</li>
		<li>Create 1 version of the recall packet (i.e., non-imagery version) that includes the traditional non-imagery instructions from protocol item 1.2.3.</li>
		<li>Assign the recruited classes to the 2 presentation types as evenly as possible.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>If the effects of list type (semantic vs. phonological) are not of interest, modify the protocol as follows to only include longer, traditional semantic DRM lists:
	<ol>
		<li>Do not use the word lists included in our supplementary materials, with the exception of the practice list. Instead, select 20 of the unmodified DRM lists included in the original Roediger &#38; McDermott study2. These word lists are 15-items long and all semantically related. Number the selected lists 1-20. Use lists 1-10 as study lists in the presentation and lists 11-20 as filler lists for the recognition test.</li>
		<li>Modify the presentations to accommodate 15-item lists instead of 8-item lists. Following the instruction slide and practice list, the procedure for each test list is 17 slides long. For each list, the first slide indicates &#34;Prepare for List X&#34;, the following 15 slides present the list words one at a time, and the last slide for the list indicates the end of the list and the beginning of recall.</li>
		<li>Modify the recognition test design described in 1.3 to include the 1st, 8th, and 10th words from the 10 study lists and 10 filler lists and their critical lures.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
</ol>
4. Procedure
<ol>
	<li>At the beginning of a regularly scheduled class session, ask the instructor to leave the room and pull up the presentation that was assigned to that class section.</li>
	<li>Introduce yourself as the researcher and distribute informed consent forms to students. Allow students to read through the informed consent document on their own. Prompt them to complete the informed consent form and to ask any questions about the document or participation.</li>
	<li>Distribute the appropriate recall packets to participants. If using an imagery condition, ensure that classes who were assigned one of the two imagery presentations receive an imagery recall packet. Do not distribute the recognition test yet.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to fill out the initial page of the recall packet with demographic information. Then read the instructions from the presentation aloud with the slide presented.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to flip to the next page in their packet for the practice list, move to presentation slide 3 (i.e., &#34;Prepare for the practice list&#34;), and read the prompt aloud. After reading the prompt, move to slide 4 and allow the presentation to progress through the timed practice list slides.</li>
	<li>When the practice list recall slide expires and automatically moves to the next list prompt slide (i.e., &#34;Prepare for list 1&#34;), prompt participants to ask any questions they have about the procedure. Answer any questions and instruct participants to turn to the next page (pg. 3) in their packet for list 1.</li>
	<li>Once all participants have turned to the next page in their booklet, read the list 1 prompt slide aloud (i.e., &#34;Prepare for list 1&#34;) and progress to the timed list 1 word list and recall slides.</li>
	<li>Continue this procedure for the 9 remaining lists, prompting participants to flip to the next page in their booklet after each recall slide expires, reading the &#34;prepare for list X&#34; slide aloud, and subsequently prompting the timed list slides.</li>
	<li>After recall for list 10, supervise as the presentation prompts participants to turn to the next page in their packet and work on the word search for 7 minutes.</li>
	<li>When the presentation automatically progresses to the final slide (i.e., &#34;One last activity&#34;), collect the recall packets from participants and distribute the final recognition test.</li>
	<li>Instruct participants to complete the final recognition test at their own pace and to do their best not to leave any items blank. Once all participants have finished the test, collect the recognition tests and verbally debrief participants (see supplementary materials for debriefing statement).</li>
</ol>

<ol>
	<li>Deese, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=On+the+prediction+of+occurrence+of+particular+verbal+intrusions+in+immediate+recall.">On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology. 58 (1), 17-22 (1959).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., McDermott, K. B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Creating+false+memories:+Remembering+words+not+presented+in+lists.">Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 21 (4), 803-814 (1995).</li><li>Gallo, D. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+fantastic+beliefs:+15+years+of+the+DRM+illusion.">False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion.</a> Memory &amp; Cognition. 38 (7), 833-848 (2010).</li><li>Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Source+attributions+and+false+memories:+A+test+of+the+demand+characteristics+account.">Source attributions and false memories: A test of the demand characteristics account.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 6 (1), 130-135 (1999).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., Balota, D. A., Watson, J. M., Roediger, H. L., Nairne, J. S., Neath, I., Surprenant, A. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Spreading+activation+and+arousal+of+false+memories.">Spreading activation and arousal of false memories.</a> The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder. , 95-115 (2001).</li><li>Roediger, H. L., Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., Gallo, D. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Factors+that+determine+false+recall:+A+multiple+regression+analysis.">Factors that determine false recall: A multiple regression analysis.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 8 (3), 385-407 (2001).</li><li>Collins, A. M., Loftus, E. F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+spreading-activation+theory+of+semantic+processing.">A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.</a> Psychological Review. 82 (6), 407-428 (1975).</li><li>Buchanan, L., Brown, N. R., Cabeza, R., Maitson, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+semantic+lexicon+arrangement.">False memories and semantic lexicon arrangement.</a> Brain and Language. 68 (1-2), 172-177 (1999).</li><li>Watson, J. M., Balota, D. A., Roediger, H. I. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Creating+false+memories+with+hybrid+lists+of+semantic+and+phonological+associates:+Over-additive+false+memories+produced+by+converging+associative+networks.">Creating false memories with hybrid lists of semantic and phonological associates: Over-additive false memories produced by converging associative networks.</a> Journal of Memory And Language. 49 (1), 95-118 (2003).</li><li>Robin, F. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+false+memories.">Imagination and false memories.</a> Imagination, Cognition, and Personality. 30 (4), 407-424 (2011).</li><li>Bays, R. B., Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Autobiographical+memories+and+the+DRM+illusion:+Investigating+the+content+and+process+of+lure+activations.">Autobiographical memories and the DRM illusion: Investigating the content and process of lure activations.</a> Applied Cognitive Psychology. 29 (5), 742-752 (2015).</li><li>Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagery+encoding+and+false+recognition+errors:+Exploring+boundary+conditions+of+imagery's+enhancing+effects.">Imagery encoding and false recognition errors: Exploring boundary conditions of imagery's enhancing effects.</a> Memory. 20 (6), 700-716 (2012).</li><li>Foley, M. A., Cowan, E., Schlemmer, E., Belser-Ehrlich, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Acts+of+generating+and+their+sources:+Predicting+the+effects+of+imagery+encoding+on+false+recognition+errors.">Acts of generating and their sources: Predicting the effects of imagery encoding on false recognition errors.</a> Memory. 20 (4), 384-399 (2012).</li><li>Oliver, M., Bays, R. B., Zabrucky, K. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=False+memories+and+the+DRM+paradigm:+Effects+of+imagery,+list+and+test+type.">False memories and the DRM paradigm: Effects of imagery, list and test type.</a> TheJournal of General Psychology. 143 (1), 33-48 (2016).</li><li>Ballou, M. R., Sommers, M. S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Similar+phenomena,+different+mechanisms:+Semantic+and+phonological+false+memories+are+produced+by+independent+mechanisms.">Similar phenomena, different mechanisms: Semantic and phonological false memories are produced by independent mechanisms.</a> Memory &amp; cognition. 36 (8), 1450-1459 (2008).</li><li>Garry, M., Manning, C. G., Loftus, E. F., Sherman, S. J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+inflation:+Imagining+a+childhood+event+inflates+confidence+that+it+occurred.">Imagination inflation: Imagining a childhood event inflates confidence that it occurred.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 3 (2), 208-214 (1996).</li><li>Garry, M., Polascheck, D. L. L. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+memory.">Imagination and memory.</a> Current Directions in Psychological Science. 9 (1), 6-10 (2000).</li><li>Hyman, I. E., Pentland, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+role+mental+imagery+in+the+creation+of+false+childhood+memories.">The role mental imagery in the creation of false childhood memories.</a> Journal of Memory and Language. 35 (2), 101-117 (1996).</li><li>Bays, R. B., Zabrucky, K. M., Foley, M. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagery+induction+processes+differentially+impact+imagination+inflation.">Imagery induction processes differentially impact imagination inflation.</a> Imagination, Cognition, and Personality. 35 (1), 5-25 (2015).</li><li>Wade, K. A., Garry, M., Read, J. D., Lindsay, D. S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+picture+is+worth+a+thousand+lies:+Using+false+photographs+to+create+false+childhood+memories.">A picture is worth a thousand lies: Using false photographs to create false childhood memories.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 9 (3), 597-603 (2002).</li><li>Foley, M. A., Wozniak, K. H., Gillum, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Imagination+and+false+memory+inductions:+investigating+the+role+of+process,+content+and+source+of+imaginations.">Imagination and false memory inductions: investigating the role of process, content and source of imaginations.</a> Applied Cognitive Psychology. 20 (9), 1119 (2006).</li><li>McDermott, K. B., Watson, J. M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+rise+and+fall+of+false+recall:+The+impact+of+presentation+duration.">The rise and fall of false recall: The impact of presentation duration.</a> Journal of Memory and Language. 45 (1), 160-176 (2001).</li><li>Robin, F., Mah&#233;, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Effects+of+image+and+verbal+generation+on+false+memory.">Effects of image and verbal generation on false memory.</a> Imagination, Cognition and Personality. 35 (1), 26-46 (2015).</li></ol>

The authors have nothing to disclose.

The protocol employed in this study modified a widely used word list procedure, the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm, to assess the effects of associative processing with and without imagery instructions on false memories in a classroom-based procedure. The expansion to include the variables of list association type, test type, and imagery instruction implemented here afforded the ability to analyze how each of these complex factors influenced a learning context independently, as well as how they interacted, provi...

Memory is malleable and fallible, and these days people realize the limitations of their own memory system. But how do memory errors arise? What mechanisms are responsible for errors in memory retrieval? We modified a widely used and highly cited laboratory-based procedure called the Deese Roediger McDermott paradigm (DRM)1,2 to investigate the influence of different variables on memory errors. In traditional DRM procedures, participants are asked to learn lists of semantically related words (e.g., table, couch, desk, lamp, pillow, stool, bench, rocker). When later asked to recall and/or recognize the words from the lists, participants often report seeing words that were semantically related to the lists but not actually studied (e.g., chair). False memories for these words, referred to as critical lures, can occur 55% - 80% of the time in standard procedures2,3.
The Activation Monitoring Framework is often cited as a theoretical basis for memory errors that arise from the DRM paradigm. Specifically, DRM false memories are attributed to the dual processes of activation (i.e., the tendency for pieces of information currently active in working memory to &#34;spread&#34; and also activate other, related pieces of information) and monitoring (i.e., assessing the accuracy and/or source of something being remembered)5,6. The process of studying semantically related DRM lists causes activation to spread from the list words to the critical lure and thus activates the critical lure in working memory. The result is a false memory that may not be accurately monitored during later tasks.
The three-phase testing procedure inherent to the DRM paradigm allows cognitive psychologists to manipulate a number of variables during the process of encoding (study of the list items), retention (storage of the list items while completing a distractor task to disrupt working memory), or retrieval (a memory test), to better understand the specific processes that contribute to memory errors. Our procedure expands use of traditional DRM procedures to directly compare memory error rates for different types of content during encoding (e.g., semantically related versus phonologically related)9, test type during retrieval (e.g., a recall task versus a recognition task)10 and, perhaps most notably, imagery encoding processes during list study11,12,13,14.
Our primary interest in developing this protocol was to better understand possible effects of imagery on recall and recognition, particularly whether the effects of creating mental images of the list words during encoding (e.g., imagining them) would vary according to whether the list words were related to the critical lure according to sound (i.e., phonologically) or meaning (i.e., semantically). For instance, for the phonological list log, hog, dock, bog, fog, doll, frog, jog, and dot, the critical lure is dog. For the semantic list mug, saucer, tea, coaster, lid, coffee, straw, and soup, the critical lure is cup. We were interested in whether imaging the list words affected the associative processing for those lists differently. While traditional DRM word lists contain 12-15 semantically related list words2, our procedure employed 8-item word lists. These lists were modified from 16-item lists previously developed to investigate the converging effects of phonological and semantic word associations on false memories9. In order to adapt typical DRM procedures to include imagery instructions, we shortened the word lists by selecting the 8 words from each list that were easiest to create mental images of. This allowed for the elimination of less concrete words (e.g., pun, worst) that were hard to imagine. Additionally, we modified a computer-based word list presentation utilized in previous research15 to standardize the presentation of materials and also developed paper/pencil recall and recognition measures to more appropriately suit classroom environments.
Our results did not suggest an interaction between list association type and imagery procedures, but they did demonstrate the significant main effects of imagery and list type14. We pursued this line of inquiry because of the robust literature of imagination inflation effects suggesting enhanced feelings of belief and memory in past childhood events that are repeatedly imagined16,17,18. However, recently researchers suggest that perhaps not all imagery is created equal and that the nature of imagery instructions mediates the effects on false memory rates19. One possible limitation to the work assessing imagination inflation effects is inherent in the procedure itself. That is, participants are asked to provide Likert scale ratings of their confidence or belief in experiencing certain events in childhood, and following imagination of those events, ratings are provided a second time to assess changes (specifically increases) in those ratings. One possible problem with this procedure is a lack of control over the veracity of experiences that participants must identify with confidence ratings both prior to and after the imagery phase. In some studies, researchers consult family members for corroboration20; however, a majority of the research examining imagination inflation relies solely on the word of the participant.
DRM procedures offer methodological advantages over other memory paradigms, including imagination inflation procedures, because researchers maintain control over the content being activated in working memory through the design of the lists. Specifically, researchers select the list items according to their associative strength to the critical lure and can easily measure when a participant commits the targeted memory error (e.g., chair was not on the studied list but was recalled at test). This content control provides insight into processes that drive associative memory errors, affording researchers the opportunity to explore other potentially important factors driving false memory errors, such as the construction of visual images during list encoding21 or even elaborating on the list items to generate complex event narratives11.
This protocol employs a presentation administration of materials and a paper and pencil format of data collection that allows researchers to collect participant data in large groups (e.g., classrooms), while systematically varying variables. The accessibility and experimental control offered by this protocol provides an opportunity to teach students about memory processes with an in-class demonstration while reliably collecting data. Compared to laboratory-based DRM procedures, this context makes results more applicable to classroom learning, thus informing both cognitive science and educational psychology. In addition, this protocol provides optional modifications that can be utilized to remove the usage of imagery instructions or varying list types, thereby offering a construction-kit type approach that allows for more personalized use.

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse:
 collapse;width:477pt" width="637">
	<tbody>
		<tr height="21" style="height:15.75pt">
			<td class="xl63" height="21" style="height:15.75pt;width:162pt" width="216">No Materials Applicable</td>
			<td class="xl63" style="width:53pt" width="71"></td>
			<td class="xl63" style="width:89pt" width="119"></td>
			<td class="xl64" style="width:125pt" width="167"></td>
			<td style="width:48pt" width="64"></td>
		</tr>
	</tbody>
</table>

using a classroom-based deese roediger mcdermott paradigm to assess the effects of imagery on false memories

Associated word list procedures can elicit false memories in predictable ways by inducing associative processing, thus making it harder to monitor the accuracy of memories. The purpose of the method presented here was to induce false memories using lists of either semantically or phonologically related words and to assess the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. To do this, we used a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm. We adapted word lists from previous DRM studies to suit imagery procedures and created an automated presentation to present the word lists in classroom settings. We then recruited undergraduate classes and instructed some of the classes to create mental images of the list words as they were being presented, while instructing the other classes to simply remember the words. The automated presentation presented word lists to participants, one word at a time, alternating between phonologically and semantically related lists. Participants used paper-pencil recall packets to immediately recall list items, complete a distractor activity, and take a subsequent final recognition test. Often, participants immediately recalled and later recognized words that were related to the list items but were not actually presented; these are known as critical lures and indicate a false memory. The protocol detailed here describes a four-step procedure - list presentation, immediate recall, distractor phase, and final recognition - that can assess the effects of list type and imagery instruction within the DRM paradigm on memory. The automated nature of the list presentation provides the ability to systematically vary variables of interest, and the paper and pencil method of data collection affords an easily accessible method for collecting data in classroom settings. The protocol also offers options to modify the procedure to a more traditional DRM paradigm without imagery and/or list type manipulations. The use of this protocol can provide results relevant to both classroom learning and cognitive science principles.

Effects of DRM Procedures on False Memories: Standard DRM Instructions without Imagery 
To illustrate standard DRM procedures&#39; ability to induce false memories, we analyzed rates of falsely remembering non-list words during recall and recognition. Table 1 reports proportions for the different types of false remembering that occurred during recall and recognition. During immediate recall, participants recalled unpresented words on 20% of the lists...

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories at JoVE.com

Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

The method presented here induced false memories using lists of related words and also assessed the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. This protocol details a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm.

Associated word list procedures can elicit false memories in predictable ways by inducing associative processing, thus making it harder to monitor the ...

using-classroom-based-deese-roediger-mcdermott-paradigm-to-assess

Universidad de Cartagena UDEC

Research

JoVE Journal

Behavior

9.5K Views.  Mercer University. The method presented here induced false memories using lists of related words and also assessed the effects of imagery instructions on the recall and recognition of those false memories. This protocol details a modified version of the Deese Roediger McDermott (DRM) paradigm.

Video: Using a Classroom-Based Deese Roediger McDermott Paradigm to Assess the Effects of Imagery on False Memories

Using the Threat Probability Task to Assess Anxiety and Fear During Uncertain and Certain Threat

Fear of certain threat and anxiety about uncertain threat are distinct emotions with unique behavioral, cognitive-attentional, and neuroanatomical components. Both anxiety and fear can be studied in the laboratory by measuring the potentiation of the startle reflex. The startle reflex is a defensive reflex that is potentiated when an organism is threatened and the need for defense is high. The startle reflex is assessed via electromyography (EMG) in the orbicularis oculi muscle elicited by brief, intense, bursts of acoustic white noise (i.e., &#8220;startle probes&#8221;). Startle potentiation is calculated as the increase in startle response magnitude during presentation of sets of visual threat cues that signal delivery of mild electric shock relative to sets of matched cues that signal the absence of shock (no-threat cues). In the Threat Probability Task, fear is measured via startle potentiation to high probability (100% cue-contingent shock; certain) threat cues whereas anxiety is measured via startle potentiation to low probability (20% cue-contingent shock; uncertain) threat cues. Measurement of startle potentiation during the Threat Probability Task provides an objective and easily implemented alternative to assessment of negative affect via self-report or other methods (e.g., neuroimaging) that may be inappropriate or impractical for some researchers. Startle potentiation has been studied rigorously in both animals (e.g., rodents, non-human primates) and humans which facilitates animal-to-human translational research. Startle potentiation during certain and uncertain threat provides an objective measure of negative affective and distinct emotional states (fear, anxiety) to use in research on psychopathology, substance use/abuse and broadly in affective science. As such, it has been used extensively by clinical scientists interested in psychopathology etiology and by affective scientists interested in individual differences in emotion.

Potentiation of the startle reflex is measured via electromyography of the orbicularis oculi muscle during low (uncertain) and high (certain) probability electric shock threat in the Threat Probability Task. This provides an objective measure of distinct negative emotional states (fear/anxiety) for research on psychopathology, substance use/abuse, and broad affective science.

Fear of certain threat and anxiety about uncertain threat are distinct emotions with unique behavioral, cognitive-attentional, and neuroanatomical ...

Applying Stereotactic Injection Technique to Study Genetic Effects on Animal Behaviors

Stereotactic injection is a useful technique to deliver high titer lentiviruses to targeted brain areas in mice. Lentiviruses can either overexpress or knockdown gene expression in a relatively focused region without significant damage to the brain tissue. After recovery, the injected mouse can be tested on various behavioral tasks such as the Open Field Test (OFT) and the Forced Swim Test (FST). The OFT is designed to assess locomotion and the anxious phenotype in mice by measuring the amount of time that a mouse spends in the center of a novel open field. A more anxious mouse will spend significantly less time in the center of the novel field compared to controls. The FST assesses the anti-depressive phenotype by quantifying the amount of time that mice spend immobile when placed into a bucket of water. A mouse with an anti-depressive phenotype will spend significantly less time immobile compared to control animals. The goal of this protocol is to use the stereotactic injection of a lentivirus in conjunction with behavioral tests to assess how genetic factors modulate animal behaviors.

Stereotactic injection of lentiviruses expressing cDNAs or shRNAs can modulate gene expression in specific brain areas of mice. Here, we present a protocol to combine stereotactic injections with behavioral tasks, such as the Open Field Test (OFT) and the Forced Swim Test (FST).

Stereotactic injection is a useful technique to deliver high titer lentiviruses to targeted brain areas in mice. Lentiviruses can either overexpress or ...

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

The Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task is a false memory paradigm in which subjects are presented with lists of semantically related words (e.g., nurse, hospital, etc.) at encoding. After a delay, subjects are asked to recall or recognize these words. In the recognition memory version of the task, subjects are asked whether they remember previously presented words, as well as related (but never presented) critical lure words (&#39;doctor&#39;). Typically, the critical word is recognized with high probability and confidence. This false memory effect has been robustly demonstrated across short (e.g., immediate, 20 min) and long (e.g., 1, 7, 60 d) delays between encoding and memory testing. A strength of using this task to study false memory is its simplicity and short duration. If encoding and retrieval components of the task occur in the same session, the entire task can take as little as 2 - 30 min. However, although the DRM task is widely considered a &#39;false memory&#39; paradigm, some researchers consider DRM illusions to be based on the activation of semantic memory networks in the brain, and argue that such semantic gist-based false memory errors may actually be useful in some scenarios (e.g., remembering the forest for the trees; remembering that a word list was about &#34;doctors&#34;, even though the actual word &#34;doctor&#34; was never presented for study). Remembering the gist of experience (instead of or along with individual details) is arguably an adaptive process and this task has provided a great deal of knowledge about the constructive, adaptive nature of memory. Therefore, researchers should use caution when discussing the overall reach and implications of their experiments when using this task to study &#39;false memory&#39;, as DRM memory errors may not adequately reflect false memories in the real world, such as false memory in eyewitness testimony, or false memories of sexual abuse.

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Here we present the Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task, a tool to study false memories in the laboratory. Subjects study lists of semantically related words (e.g.,&#160;nurse, sick, etc.), and later falsely remember an unstudied word (doctor) that represents the gist, or theme, of the word list.

The Deese,&#160;Roediger and McDermott&#160;(DRM) task is a false memory paradigm in which subjects are presented with lists of semantically related words ...

A Within-subjects Experimental Protocol to Assess the Effects of Social Input on Infant EEG

Despite the importance of social interactions for infant brain development, little research has assessed functional neural activation while infants socially interact. Electroencephalography (EEG) power is an advantageous technique to assess infant functional neural activation. However, many studies record infant EEG only during one baseline condition. This protocol describes a paradigm that is designed to comprehensively assess infant EEG activity in both social and nonsocial contexts as well as tease apart how different types of social inputs differentially relate to infant EEG. The within-subjects paradigm includes four controlled conditions. In the nonsocial condition, infants view objects on computer screens. The joint attention condition involves an experimenter directing the infant's attention to pictures. The joint attention condition includes three types of social input: language, face-to-face interaction, and the presence of joint attention. Differences in infant EEG between the nonsocial and joint attention conditions could be due to any of these three types of input. Therefore, two additional conditions (one with language input while the experimenter is hidden behind a screen and one with face-to-face interaction) were included to assess the driving contextual factors in patterns of infant neural activation. Representative results demonstrate that infant EEG power varied by condition, both overall and differentially by brain region, supporting the functional nature of infant EEG power. This technique is advantageous in that it includes conditions that are clearly social or nonsocial and allows for examination of how specific types of social input relate to EEG power. This paradigm can be used to assess how individual differences in age, affect, socioeconomic status, and parent-infant interaction quality relate to the development of the social brain. Based on the demonstrated functional nature of infant EEG power, future studies should consider the role of EEG recording context and design conditions that are clearly social or nonsocial.

This novel protocol is designed to assess the neural bases of social interaction in infants. The paradigm is designed to tease apart how various social inputs such as language, joint attention, and face-to-face interaction relate to infant neural activation. Infant EEG power is recorded during both social and nonsocial conditions.

Despite the importance of social interactions for infant brain development, little research has assessed functional neural activation while infants ...

Using Gold-standard Gait Analysis Methods to Assess Experience Effects on Lower-limb Mechanics During Moderate High-heeled Jogging and Running

A limited number of studies have explored lower-limb biomechanics during high-heeled jogging and running, and most studies have failed to clarify the wearing experience of subjects. This protocol describes the differences in lower-limb kinematics and ground reaction force (GRF) between experienced wearers (EW) and inexperienced wearers (IEW) during moderate high-heeled jogging and running. A three-dimensional (3D) motion analysis system with a configured force platform was used to synchronously capture lower-limb joint movements and GRF. 36 young females volunteered to participate in this study and were asked about high-heeled shoe-wearing experience, including frequency, duration, heel types, and heel heights. Eleven who had the experience of 3 to 6 cm heels for a minimum of three days per week (6 h per day) for at least two years and eleven who wore high heels less than twice per month participated. Subjects performed jogging and running at comfortable low and high speeds, respectively, with the right foot completely stepping onto a force platform when passing by along a 10 m walkway. EW and IEW adopted different biomechanical adaptations while jogging and running. IEW exhibited a generally larger range of joint movement, while EW showed a dramatically larger loading rate of GRF during running. Hence, further studies on the lower-limb biomechanics of high-heeled gait should strictly control the wearing experience of the subjects.

This study investigated lower-limb kinematics and ground reaction force (GRF) during moderate high-heeled jogging and running. Subjects were divided into groups of experienced wearers and inexperienced wearers. A three-dimensional motion analysis system with a configured force platform captured lower-limb joint movements and GRF.

A limited number of studies have explored lower-limb biomechanics during high-heeled jogging and running, and most studies have failed to clarify the ...

Reinstatement of Drug-seeking in Mice Using the Conditioned Place Preference Paradigm

The present protocol describes the Conditioned Place Preference (CPP) as a model of relapse in drug addiction. In this model, animals are first trained to acquire a conditioned place preference in a drug-paired compartment, and after the post-conditioning test, they perform several sessions to extinguish the established preference. The CPP permits the evaluation of the conditioned rewarding effects of drugs related to environmental cues. Then, the extinguished CPP can be robustly reinstated by the non-contingent administration of a priming dose of the drug, and by exposure to stressful stimuli. Both methods will be explained here. When the animal reinitiates the behavioral response, a reinstatement of the conditioned reward is considered to have taken place.
The main advantages of this protocol are that it is non-invasive, inexpensive, and simple with good validity criteria. In addition, it allows the study of different environmental manipulations, such as stress or diet, which can modulate relapse into drug seeking behaviors. However, one limitation is that if the researcher aims to explore the motivation and primary reinforcing effects of the drug, it should be complemented with self-administration procedures, as they involve operant responses of animals.

This protocol describes the Conditioned Place Preference (CPP) as a model of relapse. This procedure permits the measurement of relapse in laboratory animals, considering the impact of drug-associated environmental cues as craving and relapse in abstaining addicts is currently the focus of drug-abuse treatment programs.

The present protocol describes the Conditioned Place Preference (CPP) as a model of relapse in drug addiction. In this model, animals are first trained to ...

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

The protocol for the temptation resistance paradigm was designed to elicit 2- to 8-year-old children's strategic lie-telling behaviors. The reward of transgression was intended to be too tempting to resist, so that children's spontaneous lie-telling behavior in the presence of irreversible evidence due to the transgression could be observed. Conducted in a developmental psychology laboratory behind a one-way mirror and video recorded with a hidden camcorder, the protocol starts with a guessing game where the child is given three trials to guess the identities of hidden objects under an upside down cup. The experimenter gives hints in the first two trials to make sure the child "guess" them correctly. At the beginning of the final trial, the experimenter leaves the room briefly and asks the child not to peek under the cup. If the child could not resist the temptation and peeks, small particles previously filled in the cup would scatter on a grooved surface. Upon the experimenter's return, the child is asked if he/she has peeked. If he/she denies transgression contrary to the presence of the physical evidence, he/she is asked to explain why the particles are on the table. Three responses could be observed in the procedure, including the initial transgression, truth-telling or lie-telling behavior if the child peeked, and the strategic lie-telling behavior in the presence of the physical evidence.

The protocol for the temptation resistance paradigm was designed to elicit 2- to 8-year-old children&#39;s strategic lie-telling behaviors. The reward of transgression was intended to be too tempting to resist, so that children&#39;s spontaneous lie-telling behavior in the presence of irreversible evidence due to the transgression could be observed.

The protocol for the temptation resistance paradigm was designed to elicit 2- to 8-year-old children's strategic lie-telling behaviors. The reward of ...

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

In a typical eye tracking study using the visual world paradigm, participants' eye movements to objects or pictures in the visual workspace are recorded via an eye tracker as the participant produces or comprehends a spoken language describing the concurrent visual world. This paradigm has high versatility, as it can be used in a wide range of populations, including those who cannot read and/or who cannot overtly give their behavioral responses, such as preliterate children, elderly adults, and patients. More importantly, the paradigm is extremely sensitive to fine grained manipulations of the speech signal, and it can be used to study the online processing of most topics in language comprehension at multiple levels, such as the fine grained acoustic phonetic features, the properties of words, and the linguistic structures. The protocol described in this article illustrates how a typical visual world eye tracking study is conducted, with an example showing how the online processing of some semantically complex statements can be explored with the visual world paradigm.

The visual world paradigm monitors participants' eye movements in the visual workspace as they are listening to or speaking a spoken language. This paradigm can be used to investigate the online processing of a wide range of psycholinguistic questions, including semantically complex statements, such as disjunctive statements.

In a typical eye tracking study using the visual world paradigm, participants' eye movements to objects or pictures in the visual workspace are recorded ...

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Collective human behavior such as group movement frequently shows surprising patterns and regularities, such as the emergence of leadership. Recent literature has revealed that these patterns, often visible at the global level of the group, are based on self-organized, individual behaviors that follow several simple local parameters. Understanding the dynamics of human collective behavior can help to improve coordination and leadership in group and crowd scenarios, such as identifying the ideal placement and number of emergency exits in buildings.
In this article, we present the experimental paradigm HoneyComb, which can be used to systematically investigate conditions and effects of human collective behavior. This paradigm uses a computer-based multi-user platform, providing a setting that can be shaped and adapted to various types of research questions. Situational conditions (e.g., cost-benefit ratios for specific behavior, monetary incentives and resources, various degrees of uncertainty) can be set by experimenters, depending on the research question. Each participant's motions are recorded by the server as hexagonal coordinates with timestamps at an accuracy of 50 ms and with individual IDs. Thus, a metric can be defined on the playfield, and movement parameters (e.g., distances, velocity, clustering, etc.) of participants can be measured over time. Movement data can in turn be combined with non-computerized data from questionnaires garnered within the same experiment setup.
The HoneyComb paradigm is paving the way for new types of human movement experiments. We demonstrate here that these experiments can render results with sufficient internal validity to meaningfully deepen our understanding of human collective behavior.

Here, we present the computer-based, multi-agent game HoneyComb, which enables experimental investigations of collective human movement behavior via black-dot-avatars on a virtual 2D hexagonal playfield. Different experimental conditions, like variable&#160;incentives on goal fields or vision radius, can be set, and their effects on human movement behavior can be investigated.

Collective human behavior such as group movement frequently shows surprising patterns and regularities, such as the emergence of leadership. Recent ...

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children

Self-distancing (i.e., creating mental distance between the self and a stimulus by adopting a less egocentric perspective) has been studied as a way to improve adolescents' and adults' emotion regulation. These studies instruct adolescents and adults to use visual imagery or language to create distance from the self before engaging in self-regulation tasks and when thinking about past and future events. For example, adults are asked to recall past, negative emotional experiences from either a first-person perspective (no distance) or a third-person perspective (self-distanced). These studies show that a self-distanced perspective allows adults to cope more adaptively when recalling negative feelings. However, the self-distancing paradigm used with adults was not developmentally appropriate for young children. This modified self-distancing paradigm involves instructing children to think about their thoughts, feelings, and actions from different perspectives that vary in their distance from the self while completing a self-regulation task. The paradigm involves randomly assigning children to use one of three perspectives: self-immersed, third-person, or exemplar. In the self-immersed condition, children are asked to think about themselves using the first-person perspective (e.g., "How am I feeling?") and no distance is created from the self. In the third-person condition, children are asked to create distance from the self by using the third-person perspective (e.g., "How is [child's name] feeling?"). In the exemplar condition, the greatest distance from the self is created by asking children to pretend to be a media character and to think about that character's thoughts and feelings (e.g., "How is Batman feeling?"). Studies using the self-distancing paradigm with 4-6-year-olds have found that as the amount of distance from the self increases (self-immersed &lt; third-person &lt; exemplar), children perform better on self-regulation tasks. These findings suggest that the strategies implemented in the self-distancing protocol may be useful to include in self-regulation interventions for young children.

An experimental paradigm was created to measure the effects of self-distancing in young children (4-6-year-olds). Self-distancing is a process through which individuals adopt a less egocentric perspective. This paradigm has been used to examine the effects of self-distancing on young children&#39;s self-regulation.

Self-distancing (i.e., creating mental distance between the self and a stimulus by adopting a less egocentric perspective) has been studied as a way to ...