Scholarship & Research
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://scholarworks.montana.edu/handle/1/1
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item The role of working memory capacity and cognitive load in producing and detecting deception(Montana State University - Bozeman, College of Letters & Science, 2016) Maldonado, Ted; Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Keith A. HutchisonThe purpose of this study was to examine the effects of age, working memory capacity (WMC) and cognitive load on people's ability to tell and detect lies. The literature is inconsistent on what individual characteristics are critical to being a good liar. Zukerman, DePaulo, and Rosenthal (1981) suggested that lying is cognitively demanding. Therefore, WMC might provide an advantage for some when telling a convincing lie, such that higher WMC individuals can handle the high cognitive load associated with lying. I examined this across two experiments. I predicted that individuals with higher WMC would be able to better tell more convincing lies, because such individuals are better at suppressing prepotent, but goal irrelevant information, such as the truth. Additionally, higher WMC individuals are better equipped to focus and tune out distraction that accompanies a high cognitive load. I also predicted that younger individuals will have an easier time telling convincing lies than older adults. As we age, cognitive functioning, like WMC, declines, and with this decline, so does our ability to deceive others. In Experiment 1, young adult dyads took turns telling truths and lies, under high and low cognitive load. The detector tried to determine whether their partner was truthful or deceitful. In Experiment 2, younger and older adults told truths and lies into a camera and two young adult detectors tried to detect the truths and lies, at a later time. I found a positive relationship between WMC and telling lies such that higher WMC individuals had fewer of their lies detected when under high load. I also found that a higher WMC improved the ability to comply when asked to tell a truth or lie. I also found that when responding to questions, participants found it easier to comply when asked to lie or when under high cognitive load. In regard to age differences, older adults found it more difficult to tell lies than truths. Issues within deception could involve specific memory processes and require more research to understand what aspects of memory are involved in telling a convincing lie.Item Social contagion of memory in young and older adults(Montana State University - Bozeman, College of Letters & Science, 2011) Davis, Sara Dawn; Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Michelle L. MeadeThe current study examined age differences in the social contagion of memory paradigm developed by Roediger, Meade, and Bergman (2001). In the social contagion paradigm, participants are exposed to the erroneous memory reports of a confederate after viewing a series of schematically arranged household scenes. Age differences were examined at two levels. First, participant age was manipulated in order to determine whether older adults were more susceptible to socially encountered misinformation than young adults. Second, the age of the source of misinformation was manipulated to determine how perceptions of the source may influence contagion. The results indicated that suggestions of older adult confederates impact participants' memory reports less than the suggestions of young adults in free recall. However, the mechanism for this effect differs in terms of participant age. Young adult participants appear to discount the suggestions of older adult confederates, while older adult participants appear to devote less processing to the collaboration of the older confederate. Additionally, older adults were not more susceptible to social contagion than were young adults, even when given more time to view the stimuli.Item Differential response biases between older and younger adults on recall tests(Montana State University - Bozeman, College of Letters & Science, 2010) Huff, Mark Jordan; Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Michelle L. MeadeThis study examined the role of differential response biases between older and younger adults on recall performance and confidence judgments. Participants studied categorized and unrelated word lists and were asked to recall the items under one of the following test conditions: standard free recall, free recall with a penalty for guessing, free recall with no penalty for guessing, or forced recall. The results showed that both older and younger adults adjusted their responses in accordance with test instructions. Older adults reported a greater number of intrusions relative to younger adults in both standard and penalty instructions, particularly those intrusions that were plausible given a prior study list. Additionally, older adults were more likely to report intrusions with greater confidence that they were presented on an earlier studied list. Results demonstrate that older adults report memory information on free recall tasks with a liberal response bias, as evidenced by a decreased ability to withhold reporting intrusions and claiming to remember intrusions with greater confidence compared to younger adults.Item Aging and prospective memory : the role of cue familiarity(Montana State University - Bozeman, College of Letters & Science, 2009) Rand, Kristina Marie; Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Keith A. HutchisonOlder adults often show age-related declines in retrospective and prospective memory (PM). However, when memory is tested in a way that allows for reliance on familiarity, age-related declines are eliminated. Recent research has indicated that on a number of tests of PM, no age-related memory deficits were found. It is hypothesized that such tests allow older adults to rely on familiarity to detect the PM cue. The current study uses a PM task on which reliance on familiarity will lead to a measurable error that can be distinguished from a general PM deficit. It is hypothesized that older adults will make more familiarity-based errors than younger adults while performing worse overall.