IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0215283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

There is no item vs. I wish there were an item: Implicit negation causes false recall just as well as explicit negation

Author

Listed:
  • Józef Maciuszek
  • Mateusz Polak
  • Martyna Sekulak

Abstract

When talking about absence, we may express it in a negative statement (using explicit negation e.g. I was not) or in a positive statement (using implicit negation e.g. I wished I were). Previous research has shown that explicitly negated statements may cause false recall–negated items may paradoxically be remembered as present. The current study compares false recall caused by implicit and explicit negation. Participants listened to a recording in which some objects were mentioned as present, some as absent, and some not mentioned at all. The absence of objects was expressed using explicit or implicit negation. Participants’ recall of the recording was measured either five minutes or one week after exposure to the recording. Results indicate that implicit and explicit negation lead to a nearly identical false recall of negated items. However, items not mentioned in the recording (i.e. neither mentioned nor negated) were more often recognized as present by participants exposed to implicit, rather than explicit negation. We postulate that false recall of negated items could be explained by participants remembering the item itself, but forgetting the context in which it was present (an affirmative or a negative statement), hence objects would be recalled as present just because they were spoken of.

Suggested Citation

  • Józef Maciuszek & Mateusz Polak & Martyna Sekulak, 2019. "There is no item vs. I wish there were an item: Implicit negation causes false recall just as well as explicit negation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-12, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0215283
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215283
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215283&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0215283?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0215283. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.