The potential for false memories is bigger than what Brewin and Andrews suggest

Henry Otgaar*, Harald Merckelbach, Marko Jelicic, Tom Smeets

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

11 Citations (Web of Science)


Brewin and Andrews (2016) reviewed the literature on false memory propensity for childhood events. In this commentary, we critically evaluate their basic claim that proneness to false memories of childhood experiences is more limited than has been articulated in the literature. We show that Brewin and Andrews were selective in their inclusion of false memory studies, thereby ignoring relevant research related to autobiographical false memories. Equally important, and in contrast to what Brewin and Andrews claim, we show that implanted false memories elicited by misinformation are characterized by high confidence. The Authors Applied Cognitive Psychology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)24-25
JournalApplied Cognitive Psychology
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Cite this