|Title||Composites, compromises, and CHARM: what is the evidence for blend memory representations?|
|Publication Type||Journal Article|
|Year of Publication||1991|
|Authors||Schooler JW, Tanaka JW|
|Journal||J Exp Psychol Gen|
|Pagination||96-100; discussion 101-5|
|Date Published||1991 Mar|
|Keywords||Association Learning, attention, Discrimination Learning, Humans, Mental Recall, Retention (Psychology), Visual Perception|
Metcalfe's (1990) distributed memory model simulates many misinformation effects by assuming representations that superimpose information from multiple sources. In the present article, two types of evidence are reviewed for such "blend" representations: composite recollections, including items from both the original and postevent sources (e.g., a previously seen intersection is remembered with a subsequently suggested stop sign), and compromise recollections, including features that cannot be exclusively associated with either source (e.g., a green car that was later suggested to be blue is remembered as bluish green). The considerable evidence for composite recollections provides little support for blend representations. Compromise recollections, though seemingly more persuasive, are both rare and interpretable without postulating blend representations. Speculation is made about potential findings that would support blend representations.
|Alternate Journal||J Exp Psychol Gen|
Composites, compromises, and CHARM: what is the evidence for blend memory representations?