Research confirms that guided imagery (e.g., asking people to visualize a scene in a park in a particular way) may lead people to report aspects of events that never occurred or to report entire episodes that were only experienced in thought. How does guided imagery result in these memory errors? Is the act of generating an image the culprit? Is it the vividness of the images? Or is it possible that the way in which the images are induced is crucial for producing the deleterious effects on memory? An NSF-funded research project conducted by Dr. Mary Ann Foley at Skidmore College will determine the extent to which guided imagery may result in costs (memory errors) or benefits (improved memory accuracy). The research will attempt to disentangle the complex ways in which guided imagery may affect memory. In a series of experiments, after generating images of complex scenes involving plausible life events, participants will be asked to remember whether details included as test items were explicitly mentioned in the scripts that were used to generate the imagined scenarios. These questions will be investigated by examining script content (e.g., whether or not it is relevant to the participant), and individual differences in imagery experiences (e.g., the frequency with which people experience imagery in their daily lives). The script author will also be varied (e.g., the experimenter or the individual participants), because prior research has routinely relied on experimenter-generated descriptions to guide people's imagery experiences. It may well be that memory errors will be reduced or eliminated when people are their own source of the descriptions guiding the imagery.
This research project has a number of implications. The findings will speak to conflicting patterns in the literature on the effects of imagery on memory, refine theories intended to explain the positive or negative effects of imagery, and invite researchers to conceptualize questions about imagery and memory in new ways. The new knowledge may also inform educational, legal, and forensic practices. This research will contribute to the identification and educational development of the next generation of scientists. Undergraduates will be involved in all stages of the investigations, benefitting from meaningful research activities and enriching their education in the psychological sciences. Special attention will be given to attracting undergraduates early in their careers (e.g., recruiting first-year students on the campus where the research is conducted as well as students at nearby community colleges). A postdoctoral fellow will have a unique opportunity to contribute to both undergraduate research and teaching. Finally, through sponsorship of public lectures and panel discussions on campus, this project will showcase the synergistic benefits of drawing together students, scientists, other professionals, and other members of the broader community.
People often report experiencing rich images when recollecting and reminiscing about their meaningful life experiences. Indeed, casual observations, as well as stories in the popular press, provide fertile illustrations of the powerful effects of imagery on memory. Although imagery in particular and imagination more broadly may contribute to the richness of people’s experiences, both the processes giving rise to imagery and imagery content can lead to considerable memory errors. Prompting people to visualize scenes in particular ways (e.g., a park scene) can later lead them to report experiencing aspects of events that never occurred or to report experiencing entire episodes that they only thought about. When these guided visualizations are prompted over multiple sessions, people can also come to believe that the imagined scenarios (e.g., a wedding, an emergency room visit) were based on actual events from their childhood. Although these negative imagery effects are robust, investigations involving these imagery induction techniques often raise at least as many questions (both theoretical and practical) as they resolve. The goal of the research supported by this grant was to advance our understanding of the mechanisms contributing to imagery’s effects—both its benefits and costs—on memory. In particular, we focused on the source of the materials guiding visualizations (i.e., participant vs. peer), the context in which the descriptions were constructed (i.e., with participants working on their own or in collaboration with a peer), and the description content (e.g., participants’ references to perceptual details or to life experiences). The focus on source is a unique feature of our work. Although rarely mentioned in the literature, in many prior studies, a collaborative component is implicit in the imagery induction tasks. In essence, the tasks often involve a collaborative exchange between an experimenter and participant with the experimenter providing specific guidance to participants about how to visualize. Thus, it was imperative to explore source effects within both individual and collaborative contexts. In a key condition in our studies, participants created their own materials (e.g., describing ways in which a set of objects might be used to accomplish a goal) and visualized what they described. Relative to participants in comparison groups who were told how to visualize (e.g., object interactions), those participants who created their own materials for guiding visualizations subsequently committed substantially fewer errors. Moreover, under some task conditions (e.g., working together with a friend), participants’ description content correlated with errors such that the more elaborate the descriptions (e.g., more cohesive or story-like), the fewer the memory errors, a finding not predicted by traditional memory theories. Our findings speak to factors contributing to conflicting patterns in the literature about imagery’s effects on memory, refine theories intended to explain the beneficial or costly effects of imagery, and invite new ways to conceptualize questions about imagination and memory. The new knowledge established by these findings is also expected to inform educational, clinical, and forensic practices. The broad implications of this research project are discussed more fully in publications supported by the grant. This project contributed enormously to the professional development of young scientists by way of a postdoctoral fellowship and intensive undergraduate research experiences. Over 50 undergraduates participated as research assistants, some of whom were involved in delivering conference presentations, co-authoring peer-reviewed publications, and the recipients of prestigious research awards. The postdoctoral fellowship was unusual in design in that the mentoring plan was crafted to provide the enhancement of both research and teaching, establishing the scaffolding for a productive faculty career. The research project also provided opportunities for extended interactions among professionals (e.g., including faculty in the humanities, practicing clinicians, and high school teachers) by way of public lectures, workshops, and panel discussions. These sponsored events were broad in scope, highlighting the interactions between science and society and laying groundwork for future interdisciplinary exchanges.
