Human memory may be unreliable after just a few seconds, scientists find

[DonR]

Human memory may be unreliable after just a few seconds, scientists find

Short-term memory illusions can happen when we ‘start filling in based on our expectations’, study suggests

www.theguardian.com

“Even at the shortest term, our memory might not be fully reliable,” said Dr Marte Otten, the first author of the research from the University of Amsterdam. “Particularly when we have strong expectations about how the world should be, when our memory starts fading a little bit – even after one and a half seconds, two seconds, three seconds – then we start filling in based on our expectations.”

oh dear....

 

[Martinvb]

People are prediction machines: we see what we expect to see, not what we might see when we look carefully.

 

[sq225917]

Partly, but then why is it i can identify a remix/ remaster of a favourite tune when I hear it, they always stand out like a saw thumb.

 

[Willem]

It confirms that audio comparisons are only valid with instant switching between short fragments rather than the audiophile habit of listening for extended periods.

 

[Martinvb]

Partly, but then why is it i can identify a remix/ remaster of a favourite tune when I hear it, they always stand out like a saw thumb.

Because what you hear does not fully match with what you expect and there is ongoing evidence available to check this assumption? If this context is lacking this becomes more difficult. Indeed we tend to register the novelty of an experience, not so much the repetitive aspects.

 

[Martinvb]

It reminds me of interesting research from the Philips laboratories into how people may be fooled into hearing low frequencies reproduced by small speakers. Again, you fill in what you expect to hear (but physically is not there…).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254746177_Reproducing_low-pitched_signals_through_small_loudspeakers

 

[Willem]

This is a fascinating article for more than one reason.

 

[IAtaman]

Interesting. I thought the exact opposite - what a waste of an article.

One research says when we are presented with an inverted image of a shape we are familiar with, we struggle to remember it. Groundbreaking. Lets put a remotely relevant title on it that would attract attention, publish it on the website and call it neuroscience section. Named first author of the research is from Social and Behavioral Sciences, how is this neuroscience?

 

[Willem]

I meant the Philips research

 

[IAtaman]

I meant the Philips research

Oh. Right. Yes, that is indeed interesting. Who would have thought that the answer to smaller subs would be a bridge rectifier. Shame next year Philips exited consumer audio business. Maybe they would be able to come up with something that actually worked. Thank you for pointing out the other article

 

[JktHifi]

Machines are boring whereas Human are exciting. Because sometimes we need to forget something, not just stay like non-volatile memory. It’s more exciting if we found someone lost memory then remember again.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Of course we've already known this for years with regard to audio. That why sites like this insist the only valid audio tests are double blind, level matched (to within .1 db) tests with instantaneous switching. That doesn't mean you won't notice egregious differences (like the presence of 15 percent IMD at 1kz), but your memory will be of your perception, not the actual sound.

 

[Reddoc]

Unless the researchers made notes about the results of their tests within one-and-a-half seconds, then their research is totally unreliable.

 

[Keith_W]

I came into this thread to read something, but I forgot why I opened the thread.

 

[RayDunzl]

"Human memory may be unreliable after just a few seconds"

Not for everyone.

Hyperthymesia

 

[raif71]

 

[Anonamemouse]

"Human memory may be unreliable after just a few seconds"

Not for everyone.

Hyperthymesia

Now that would be interesting. I don't remember anything from before I was about 25, apart from a few flashes here and there.

 

[Dimitri]

Studies are like standards and high-end cables ...So many to choose from

 

[Dimitri]

Partly, but then why is it i can identify a remix/ remaster of a favourite tune when I hear it, they always stand out like a saw thumb.

Probably because it doesn't involve looking at letters of the alphabet like they used in the study !


From the study: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0283257
"All experiments rely on the extensive experience participants have with the alphabet. Previous experience with letters should have provided participants with abundant evidence that letters typically appear in their standard form. This should provide strong internal expectations about the appearance of the letters of the alphabet"

 

[Dimitri]

It confirms that audio comparisons are only valid with instant switching between short fragments rather than the audiophile habit of listening for extended periods.

Your recollection of the study may be faulty