From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
|
|
|
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|
Planned changes: |
Planned changes: |
||
|
– Add information about immediate false memory formation in young children (4-8 years old) |
– Add information about immediate false memory formation in young children (4-8 years old) |
||
|
– Explain that young children (even 4-year-olds) create gist-based false memories as readily as older children in working memory tasks |
– Explain that young children (even 4-year-olds) create gist-based false memories as readily as older children in working memory tasks |
||
|
– Clarify that these are encoding errors happening within seconds of witnessing events, not just retrieval problems after long delays |
– Clarify that these are encoding errors happening within seconds of witnessing events, not just retrieval problems after long delays |
||
|
– Discuss implications for child witness reliability in legal contexts – young witnesses may have false memories form immediately at the time of witnessing, not just during later recall |
– Discuss implications for child witness reliability in legal contexts – young witnesses may have false memories form immediately at the time of witnessing, not just during later recall |
||
|
– Add 2-3 paragraphs with citation to Rousselle et al. (2023) |
– Add 2-3 paragraphs with citation to Rousselle et al. (2023) |
||
|
Key points to include: |
Key points to include: |
||
|
– Both 4-year-olds and 8-year-olds extract gist (general themes) from information and falsely recognize related items |
– Both 4-year-olds and 8-year-olds extract gist (general themes) from information and falsely recognize related items |
||
|
– This contradicts traditional findings that false memories increase with age in long-term memory paradigms |
– This contradicts traditional findings that false memories increase with age in long-term memory paradigms |
||
|
– The difference is these are immediate working memory errors versus delayed recall errors |
– The difference is these are immediate working memory errors versus delayed recall errors |
||
|
– Relevant for understanding when and how children’s testimony may be unreliable |
– Relevant for understanding when and how children’s testimony may be unreliable |
||
Latest revision as of 15:23, 6 October 2025
Outline of proposed changes
[edit]
Section to edit: Child witnesses or Developmental factors section
Planned changes:
– Add information about immediate false memory formation in young children (4-8 years old)
– Explain that young children (even 4-year-olds) create gist-based false memories as readily as older children in working memory tasks
– Clarify that these are encoding errors happening within seconds of witnessing events, not just retrieval problems after long delays
– Discuss implications for child witness reliability in legal contexts – young witnesses may have false memories form immediately at the time of witnessing, not just during later recall
– Add 2-3 paragraphs with citation to Rousselle et al. (2023)
Key points to include:
– Both 4-year-olds and 8-year-olds extract gist (general themes) from information and falsely recognize related items
– This contradicts traditional findings that false memories increase with age in long-term memory paradigms
– The difference is these are immediate working memory errors versus delayed recall errors
– Relevant for understanding when and how children’s testimony may be unreliable
 |
Now that you have compiled a bibliography, it’s time to plan out how you’ll improve your assigned article.
In this section, write up a concise outline of how the sources you’ve identified will add relevant information to your chosen article. Be sure to discuss what content gap your additions tackle and how these additions will improve the article’s quality. Consider other changes you’ll make to the article, including possible deletions of irrelevant, outdated, or incorrect information, restructuring of the article to improve its readability or any other change you plan on making. This is your chance to really think about how your proposed additions will improve your chosen article and to vet your sources even further. Note: This is not a draft. This is an outline/plan where you can think about how the sources you’ve identified will fill in a content gap. |
