I. The Great Illusionist · Episode 2

Memory, the Storyteller

A memory test.

Fifteen words are about to appear, one at a time. Remember as many as you can: you will have to pick them out in a minute.

Full transcript of the episode (it gives away every surprise)

A memory test.

Fifteen words are about to appear, one at a time. Remember as many as you can: you will have to pick them out in a minute.

Interactive experiment

Fifteen words

Concentrate. Each word stays on screen for a little over a second.

Fifteen words scroll by: bed, rest, awake, tired, dream, wake, blanket, doze, snore, nap, peace, yawn, pillow, night, lullaby. After a short distraction, the reader checks the words they think they saw, in a list that also contains the word “sleep.”

You didn’t check “sleep.” Well done… but admit it, you hesitated.

The word “sleep” was never shown.

In experiments like this one, most participants “recognize” this trap word, often as confidently as the words they actually read.

Memory, the Storyteller

Your memory doesn’t record: it rebuilds. And it makes things up without telling you.

Your memory is not a hard drive. It doesn’t store recordings: it keeps fragments, and above all meaning.

Every time you remember, it rebuilds the scene from those fragments, filling in the gaps with whatever seems logical. Exactly like your eyes with their blind spot.

If memory rebuilds, can it be manipulated from the outside? Sometimes a single word is enough. Watch the next scene carefully: you are a witness.

Interactive experiment

The witness is you

A few seconds of animation, then two questions.

Two cars bump gently into each other at an intersection, without any damage at all. The reader is then asked how fast the cars were going “when they smashed into each other,” and whether they saw any broken glass.

You didn’t see any broken glass. Well spotted.

There wasn’t any.

The word “smashed,” slipped into the question, is enough to make the accident more violent in memory.

In 1974, the psychologist Elizabeth Loftus showed students a film of an accident, then asked them the same question with different verbs. The verb changed the speed they “remembered.”

A week later, those who had heard “smashed” were twice as likely to remember broken glass. There was none in the film.

She went much further. In 1995, with the help of their families, she reminded volunteers of four episodes from their childhood. Three were true. The fourth was made up: they had supposedly gotten lost in a shopping mall as little children.

A quarter of them ended up “remembering” it. With details. Sometimes with emotion.

Question for the reader

Do you have a “flashbulb” memory? A major event where you remember exactly where you were when you heard the news, and who you were with?

  • Yes, a very precise one
  • Rather vague
  • No

If you answer “Yes, a very precise one”:

Keep it in mind. And read on.

If you answer “Rather vague”:

That blur may be the most honest version. Read on.

If you answer “No”:

You may not be missing much. Read on.

January 28, 1986: the space shuttle Challenger explodes on live television, 73 seconds after liftoff. The very next day, the psychologist Ulric Neisser asks students to write down how they heard the news.

Two and a half years later, he asks them again. A quarter give a completely different version. And almost all of them are sure of themselves.

“I know that’s my handwriting, but I couldn’t have written that.”

A student, faced with her own account, in Neisser and Harsch’s study of the Challenger disaster, 1992

Certainty proves nothing. And sometimes it costs a great deal.

In 1984, in North Carolina, Jennifer Thompson, 22, was raped in her home. During the attack, she forced herself to memorize every detail of the man’s face, so that he would be convicted. She picked out Ronald Cotton. With absolute certainty.

Ronald Cotton spent more than ten years in prison. In 1995, a DNA test identified the real culprit.

Jennifer Thompson asked for his forgiveness. Ronald Cotton granted it. They became friends, and wrote a book together. In the United States, eyewitness error has played a role in nearly seven out of ten convictions overturned by DNA evidence.

Reconstruction. To remember is to rebuild. Every recall rewrites the memory a little, and the certainty you feel says nothing about how accurate it is.

Is your memory bad, then? On the contrary: it is prodigious. It simply isn’t made for archiving, but for understanding. And you can teach it some tricks.

Interactive experiment

The memory palace

Ten objects to remember, in order. For each one, picture the scene described inside your own home, as vividly as you can: colors, sounds, smells. Take your time.

Ten objects are placed, one at a time, in the reader’s home, each in a striking scene: a lobster knocking at the front door, a violin hanging in the hallway, an umbrella spinning on the couch, a pyramid of sugar on the table, a giant candle in the kitchen, an elephant in the bathtub, a clock melting on the mirror, strawberries crushed on the bed, a rocket taking off through the window, a gold key under the pillow.

The technique is twenty-five centuries old. According to Cicero, the poet Simonides of Ceos was reciting at a banquet when he was called outside. He had barely stepped out when the roof collapsed on the guests, crushing them beyond recognition.

Simonides remembered where each person had been sitting around the table: he identified every one of the dead. He had just invented the memory palace.

Memory champions don’t have brains any different from yours: they use this palace. In 2017, researchers trained ordinary volunteers for six weeks, thirty minutes a day.

Before: 26 words remembered out of 72, on average. After: 62.

Memory has yet another face.

In 1985, Clive Wearing, an English choirmaster and musicologist, was struck down by encephalitis. The virus destroyed the parts of his brain that make memories. Since then, his memory has lasted only a few seconds.

He keeps a diary. Page after page, he writes down the time and the same sentence: “Now I am really, completely awake.” Then he crosses out the line before, convinced he never wrote it.

Every time his wife Deborah walks into the room, he greets her with immense joy, as if after years apart. Even if she stepped out two minutes earlier.

Clive Wearing lost almost all his memories. Yet he can still play the piano, and conduct a choir.

And he knows that he loves her.

Memory isn’t a single thing: facts and skills, memories and feelings don’t live in the same place.

Interactive experiment

Drawing in a mirror

Follow the outline of the star without leaving the track. One detail: your line moves as if in a mirror, with up and down reversed. Make two attempts.

The reader has to follow the outline of a star with the mouse or a finger, but vertical movement is reversed, as in a mirror. The number of slips off the track and the time of each attempt are counted; the second attempt is almost always better.

Your hands learn fast, even when your head protests.

In 1962, the neuropsychologist Brenda Milner gave this test to Henry Molaison, a patient who could no longer form new memories after brain surgery. Day after day, he improved. And every day, he claimed he had never done the exercise before.

Interactive experiment

Back to the palace

A few minutes ago, you stored ten objects in your home. Walk through it in your mind, room by room: what do you find?

The reader walks in their mind through the ten places in their home and finds the objects they left there, in order.

Hold on to them.

Someone will ask you for them again. Much later. Without warning.

Your eyes invent, your memory rewrites. That leaves what makes you… you: your choices. When you decide, it really is you who decides. Isn’t it?

Sources

  • Henry Roediger and Kathleen McDermott, “Creating false memories: remembering words not presented in lists,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1995.
  • Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer, “Reconstruction of automobile destruction,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974.
  • Elizabeth Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell, “The formation of false memories,” Psychiatric Annals, 1995.
  • Ulric Neisser and Nicole Harsch, “Phantom flashbulbs: false recollections of hearing the news about Challenger,” 1992.
  • Jennifer Thompson-Cannino, Ronald Cotton and Erin Torneo, Picking Cotton, 2009; Innocence Project, data on eyewitness misidentification.
  • Cicero, De Oratore, Book II.
  • Martin Dresler et al., “Mnemonic training reshapes brain networks to support superior memory,” Neuron, 2017.
  • Deborah Wearing, Forever Today, 2005; Oliver Sacks, “The Abyss,” The New Yorker, 2007.
  • Brenda Milner, “Les troubles de la mémoire accompagnant des lésions hippocampiques bilatérales,” 1962.