Virtual Reality Creates False Memories

moon_monkey writes "There's an interesting post on NewScientistTech's blog about virtual reality inducing false memories during a recent experiment (pdf). Ann Schlosser at the University of Washington tested students' ability to learn how to use a real digital camera by operating a virtual one. Although those students who used the virtual camera found it easier to remember how the camera worked, they also experienced more 'false memories'. As the post points out, could this be a serious problem for VR going forward?"

Simple

[black6host]

Just design it the way they think it should work. Problem solved.

I'm confused

[Chineseyes]

Regardless of whether this happened in reality or a virtual reality it still happend so how are the memories false? Or is this just a matter of distinguishing between real and virtual worlds if so then that makes perfect sense because dreams imo are our own virtual reality and I've had some dreams that I couldn't distinguish between reality when I woke up.

Duh

[ari_j]

That's the whole point of virtual reality: be realistic enough to be indistinguishable from reality. The fact that it results in more false memories already is just evidence that we're finally catching up with the goals set for virtual reality decades ago.

Re:I'm confused

[Anonymous Coward]

so how are the memories false?

The memories are false because things did not really happen as the test subjects remembered.

If you have the time and/or inclination, read up on the research of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus. She (and others) have demonstrated that it is trivial to create false memories in people. More importantly, once a false memory has been created, it is otherwise indistinguishable from a real one. That means a person cannot rid themselves of a false memory any more than they can rid themselves of a real memory. The implications of this are significant.

Re:Quaid, get your ass to MARS!

[ZeroExistenZ]

There is a slight gap between "reality" and "entertainment".

I expect there is no one phenomenon of memory

[hey!]

"Memory" is a completely inadequate word to cover all the things we use it for, as if our minds were cameras that recorded our experiences on tape. There are sense memories; emotional memories; recognition memories; navigation memories; skill memories; procedure memories; narrative memories; association memories, and probably dozens more. Memory is not just recall, it has a substantial element of re-creation and imagination.

Re: Scifi Books, History, Truth, VR, and Fantasy

[TaoPhoenix]

History (dull) is the recitation of factoids that (generally) no one can dispute. However, the factoids have no meaning, and therefore little truth alone.

History (narrative) draws conclusions from the factoids, and creates historical principles. Subject to the caveat that these are only as good as the person drawing the conclusions, these historical principles have much truth, but become open to interpretation.

Contemporary fiction deliberately masks most/all factoids to sculpt a specific scenario necessary to demonstrate an overall truth the writer has noticed.

Scifi creates a subset of specific scenarios by adding new technology and social conventions to create a wider range of scenarios to use as backdrops. The best Scifi demonstrates truths which are not possible in any other genre.

Fantasy is generally an anti-technology subset cross between fictional history and mythology. It too attempts to create additional backdrop scenarios.

VR creates specific events in an alternate space that may only exist for a single specific user. If an external documentation method were used, they might be as 'factual' as any other event, but there may not be any other person able to verify these events.

We'd need a new word to describe the results of what was termed elsewhere 'faulty data processing'.

Re:I'm confused

[AI0867]

In another test, people were given some time to study a picture, it was a crossroads with stop signs. When asked what the colour of the traffic light was, 50% of the people said red, 25% said yellow and 25% said green. All insisted the traffic light was really there.

In another study, someone showed it was ridiculously easy to alter test subject's childhood memories to include things that could never have happened.

Human memory is a read-write filesystem, and recalling a memory overwrites it, recalling it with suggestions offered by the outside world can easily alter them.

--
Disclaimer: If this post doesn't make any sense, it's because I'm really, REALLY tired...

Re:In other words - "I know what I know"

[sandmaninator]

If your goal is truth, I would agree that humans brains are generally not so good at finding it. But for stuff like survival and reproduction, the brain has served humanity well. It is interesting to see the adapatations that the human brain has to make to fit in to a world where objective truth seems almost possible. At least the science users among us seem to be the most successfull right now.