Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: The fiction of memory: Elizabeth Loftus at TED Global 2013
Source:
TED
URL Source: https://blog.ted.com/tk-elizabeth-loftus-at-tedglobal-2013/
Published: Sep 30, 2018
Author: Elizabeth Loftus
Post Date: 2018-09-30 15:37:34 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 2473
Comments: 12
The fiction of memory: Elizabeth Loftus at TED Global 2013
Posted by: Kate Torgovnick May
June 11, 2013 at 7:40 pm EDT
Elizabeth Loftus begins her talk at TEDGlobal 2013 with the tragic story of Steve Titus, who was arrested in 1980 because he sort of matched the physical description of, and drove a similar car to, a man who had raped a woman in his area. Looking at a photo lineup, the victim told police that Titus looked “the closest” to the man who had raped her. But by the time the trial began, the victim had become certain that Titus was the attacker.
Memory scholar Elizabeth Loftus worked on this case, and became fascinated by the question: How did the victim’s memory go from uncertain to certain? The stakes of this shift were unbelievably high. While Titus was eventually exonerated by a journalist who tracked down the real rapist, he lost faith in the justice system, lost his job and fianceé, and became obsessed with what had happened to him. He died of a stress-related heart attack at age 35.
Loftus studies memory, but in an unconventional way. “I don’t study when people forget,” she says. “I study when people remember things that didn’t happen. I study false memories.” It’s an issue that comes up often in courts, which highly value witness testimony. In a survey of 300 cases of wrongful conviction, where a person was later exonerated of a crime, three-quarters of them had been incarcerated due to faulty human memory.
“Many people believe that memory works like recording device,” says Loftus. “But decades of research has shown that’s not the case. Memory is constructed and reconstructed. It’s more like a Wikipedia page — you can go change it, but so can other people.”
In one study conducted by Loftus, people were shown a simulated accident and were asked how fast a car was going when it either “hit” or “smashed into” a second vehicle. When the word “smashed” was used, people overestimated how fast the car was going — and reported seeing broken glass at the accident site. More recently, Loftus did a study on members of the military as they were being trained on how to handle interrogations in the event of capture. These subjects underwent a stressful physical interrogation and were later asked to identify the interrogator. If they were fed suggestive info, they would misidentify the interrogator — even if there was no physical resemblance.
“When you feed people misinformation about some experience they had, you can distort or contaminate or change their memory,” says Loftus. It doesn’t have to be done with malintent — it can be inadvertent.
In the early 1990s, Loftus became interested in a kind of story she was seeing more and more in the media. A psychotherapy patient would remember a brutal memory that they had repressed from childhood. When Loftus looked into some cases — including one where a woman had remembered being forced into a satanic ritual, forcibly impregnated, and having her stomach cut — she was struck that the physical evidence just didn’t match up with the memory. She wondered: Were the exercises of psychotherapy actually leading to false memories? She designed a study where suggestion was used to plant a memory of being lost in a mall as a child — and it stuck with a quarter of subjects. Loftus notes that other studies conducted around the globe showed that it was easy to plant traumatic childhood memories, even for highly unlikely events.
As Loftus spoke out on what might be happening in these cases, she says, she was hit with a defamation suit from one anonymous subject. “I became part of a disturbing trend in America where scientists are being sued for speaking out on matters of controversy,” she says.
More recently, Loftus drew public fire when she presented the results of a study where a memory was planted that subjects had gotten sick after eating a certain food as a child. When later presented with the food at a picnic, they ate much less of it. The inverse worked for good memories about healthy foods. This made Loftus wonder: Could the malleability of memory be used to help establish healthier behaviors? This, of course, brings up ethical dilemmas.
“When should we use this mind technology? And should we ever ban its use?” she asks. “False memories aren’t necessarily bad or unpleasant. By planting a warm fuzzy memory about a healthy food, like asparagus, we can get people to get asparagus more.”
To a big laugh, she wonders if using these tools on children was any more ethically suspect than encouraging them to believe in Santa Claus. She, however, understands why the topic makes people uncomfortable.
“Most people cherish their memories,” says Loftus. “But I know from my work just how much fiction is already in there.”
Elizabeth Loftus’s talk is now available for viewing. Watch it on TED.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Yup.
#2. To: nolu chan (#0)
I can see why the Ford supporters are staying as far away from this as possible but not the Kavanaugh supporters, funny that.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
#3. To: hondo68 (#2)
"BUMP"
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
#4. To: CZ82, Karl Rove, false memories (#3) (Edited)
The type of guy who might implant false memories, of wonderful legal opinions
Who knows if Kavanaugh or Ford were implanted with false memories? This suggests that it's possible.
I don't believe that these stories of wild parties are believable enough to prevent serving on the SCOTUS, but there's abundant evidence that Kavanaugh will be an activist justice with little regard for the constitution and rule of law.
My opposition to his confirmation is based on his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades.
#5. To: hondo68 (#4)
My opposition to his confirmation is based on his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades.
So who should have Trump nominated instead?
My impression was he did this to get the Establishment pubbies energized and on his side.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
#6. To: hondo68 (#4)
My opposition to [Judge Kavanaugh’s] confirmation is based on his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades.
I will furnish information to show that Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive experience and credentials make him one of the most exceptionally qualified Supreme Court nominees in history:
Now it's your turn to furnish information to show, as you say, “his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades”.
- On the night of his nomination, USA Today reported that “[o]n paper … Kavanaugh may be the most qualified Supreme Court nominee in generations.”
- The American Bar Association unanimously gave him its highest rating: well-qualified.
- He has served on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, often called the Nation’s “second highest court,” for more than 12 years.
- He has written more than 300 opinions and heard more than 2,000 cases.
- At least 13 of his opinions have been vindicated by the Supreme Court—an unparalleled record of influence and success across the ideological spectrum.
- He is a co-author of a leading book on judicial precedent and has published nine articles in respected academic law journals.
- He has taught for more than a decade at the Nation’s two top law schools, Yale and Harvard (where he was hired by then-Dean and now-Justice Elena Kagan).
- The New York Times noted that his teaching evaluations reflect “glowing praise … [m]ore than a few students said he was the most impressive law school professor they had ever encountered.”
- He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who became a mentor.
- He has argued before the Supreme Court.
- He served more than five years in the White House, including as White House Staff Secretary and as Associate White House Counsel.
- He was a partner at a respected law firm, where he wrote several Supreme Court briefs and also provided pro bono legal services to a range of clients.
- He is a graduate of Yale College and Yale Law School, where he was an editor on law review.
INDEPENDENT AND IMPARTIAL: Judge Kavanaugh has a clear record as an independent and impartial arbiter of the law.
- He bases his rulings on the law—not politics, policy, or the identities of the litigants.
- He has ruled both for and against businesses, workers, environmentalists, landowners, civil-rights plaintiffs, political parties, and criminal defendants.
- He ruled against the Republican National Committee in one campaign-finance case and in favor of Emily’s List (a liberal pro-choice group) in another campaign-finance case.
- He ruled in favor of a pro se African-American plaintiff who had been called the “n-word” at work, concluding that he had endured a hostile work environment.
- He has ruled in favor of convicted drug dealers and murderers who were denied fair trials.
- He has ruled in favor of environmentalist plaintiffs and the Environmental Protection Agency in some cases, and in favor of Western landowners and coal miners in others.
- He ruled at least 23 times against Bush Administration agencies from 2006 to 2008.
- His opinions are as likely to be joined in full by his Democrat-appointed colleagues (88.67 percent) as by his Republican-appointed colleagues (88.94 percent).
- On at least 10 occasions, he has sided with a Democrat-appointed colleague over the dissent of a Republican-appointed colleague.
- Chief United States Circuit Judge Garland (appointed by President Clinton and nominated for the Supreme Court by President Obama) has joined Judge Kavanaugh’s majority opinions 96.43 percent of the time.
DEVOTED TO PRECEDENT: Judge Kavanaugh’s work demonstrates a strong devotion to precedent and stability in the law.
- He co-wrote a leading book on judicial precedent with 10 other judges.
- The book explains that precedent is critical to stability in the law and “allows individuals to plan their affairs and to safely judge their legal rights.”
- He has written that it is “essential for courts to be as consistent as we possibly can.”
- His decisions have invoked stare decisis (the need to follow precedent).
- In one opinion, he described an earlier decision as “wrongly decided,” but said it was “water over the dam” because he was “bound to apply that precedent.”
MODEL OF CHARACTER: Throughout his career, Judge Kavanaugh has proven to be a model of character, integrity, and public service.
- His mother, a trailblazing prosecutor and trial judge in Maryland, inspired him to pursue a career in law.
- He has spent 25 of the 28 years of his career in public service.
- He tutors low-income students, serves meals to the homeless, and is a lector at church.
- He coaches his daughters’ basketball teams and serves as a mentor to his players.
- The mother of one player described how Judge Kavanaugh has taken her daughter to the school’s father-daughter dance every year since her husband passed away.
- He is a leader for gender equality and for supporting women in the workplace.
- More than half of the law clerks he has hired (25 of 48) are women.
- He was the first D.C. Circuit Judge ever to hire an all-female class of law clerks.
- Eighty-four percent of his female law clerks have gone on to clerk at the Supreme Court.
- In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, his female law clerks called him “one of the strongest advocates in the federal judiciary for women lawyers” and said the legal profession is “fairer and more equal” because of him.
- He is a leader in promoting racial equality and advancing minorities in the workplace.
- He wrote a law review article about ending racial discrimination in jury selection.
- He regularly visits the Yale and Harvard Black Law Students Association and has taken an active role in helping minority students obtain judicial clerkships.
- Twenty-seven percent of the law clerks he has hired (13 of 48) are racial/ethnic minorities.
- More than 10 percent of the law clerks he has hired (5 of 48) are African American—much greater than the percentage of African Americans at top law schools.
#7. To: Gatlin, BLM racist, kill whitey (#6) (Edited)
visits the Yale and Harvard Black Law Students AssociationTwenty-seven percent of the law clerks he has hired (13 of 48) are racial/ethnic minorities. More than 10 percent of the law clerks he has hired (5 of 48) are African American—much greater than the percentage of African Americans at top law schools.
Shouldn't he get some kind of affirmative action award for that? What a racist hate-whitey cracka! I hope Clarence Thomas punches his lights out.
Overall a steaming pile of steer manure. No facts beyond the obvious ones like that he's been serving the DC swamp for a long time, just spin shuck 'n jive.
Know what Peaches? White lives matter too.
#8. To: hondo68 (#7)
I tell you to “now furnish information to show, as you say, “his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades” and you come back with this:
visits the Yale and Harvard Black Law Students AssociationHow so is this the “lousy record” as a lawyer and circuit judge of which you speak?Twenty-seven percent of the law clerks he has hired (13 of 48) are racial/ethnic minorities. More than 10 percent of the law clerks he has hired (5 of 48) are African American—much greater than the percentage of African Americans at top law schools.
You are obligated to show by the nature of your accusation that his hiring policies and practices have in any way whatsoever altered his approach to good lawyering or good judging which in any way shows “his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades”.
Admit it, you can’t do that.
Are you talking “racial quotas” while being unaware that racial quotas are considered unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.
If you are not talking about that, then what in the hell are you talking about….or attempting to talk about?
You make no sense at all in this post. But then, you never do.
#9. To: hondo68 (#4) (Edited)
… there's abundant evidence that Kavanaugh will be an activist justice with little regard for the constitution.
Where is that evidence?
There is no abundant evidence that Kavanaugh will be an activist justice with little regard for the constitution.
I believe you have made a patently false statement by simply regurgitating some unsubstantiated leftist talking point you read somewhere.
Justice Kavanaugh is a strict Constitutional Textualist, exactly the opposite of the activist Justice you try to paint him to be.
Kavanaugh makes rulings strictly on the actual text of the Constitution and in the exact context of the history and meaning of words at the time it was written.
I predict that you soon shall see Justice Kavanaugh blocking the efforts of the activist Leftist Justices and judges on lower courts and thereby prevent them from inventing new “rights” and setting new “precedents” taken out of thin air with the sole purpose to push their decidedly Leftist agenda.
#10. To: CZ82, hondo68 (#5)
[hondo68 #4] My opposition to his confirmation is based on his lousy record as a lawyer and circuit judge over decades.[CZ82 #5] So who should have Trump nominated instead?
My impression was he did this to get the Establishment pubbies energized and on his side.
Trump released a list of 25 potential Supreme Court nominees in 2017.
To replace Justice Kennnedy, he created a short list which included:
- Brett Kavanaugh
- Amy Coney Barrett
- Raymond Kethledge
- Amul Thapar
- Mike Lee
- Thomas Hardiman
Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush nominee to the D.C. Circuit Court, may have been the least conservative of the lot. He was the compromise candidate to gain the solid support of the moderate Bush republicans for what promised to be a bruising battle.
Another nominee would almost certainly have been more conservative.
A very possible replacement for the Notorious RBG is Amy Coney Barrett, and she was among the final cut before Kavanaugh was chosen to replace Kennedy. Hardiman was runnerup to Gorsuch.
If the Dems did not like Kavanaugh, they will go bonkers with Barrett. She says it loud, she's pro-life and she's proud. She's unapologeticly conservative. And the catastrophic collapse of the attempted political hit job on Kavanaugh has paved the way for the nomination of Barrett with approval by a republican senate.
In any case, Trump published a 25-name list and said he would choose from that list, and that is what he did.
Among the possibles to leave the Court are Justice Breyer who is 80 years old, Justice Ginsburg who is 85, Justice Sotomayor (health), and Justice Thomas who is 70 and might choose to be replaced by a conservative.
#11. To: Gatlin (#6)
More than 10 percent of the law clerks he has hired (5 of 48) are African American—much greater than the percentage of African Americans at top law schools.
Kavanaugh just tied Ginsburg for Black clerks hired at SCOTUS. In 25 years, Ginsburg has hired over 100 clerks, one of whom was black. Kavanaugh has hired five clerks, one of whom is black. They are tied at one apiece.
At Ginsburg's 1993 confirmation hearings, Sen. Hatch posed a hypothetical question about a small business in a majority Black city that hired more than 50 people over a period of years, with not one black among them. Sen. Hatch went on to point out that was her 13-year record for clerkship hiring on the D.C. Circuit. 0 for 57.
Hypothetical at 55m:40s. Ginsburg record pointed out at 1hr:03m.00s
#12. To: nolu chan (#10)
Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush nominee to the D.C. Circuit Court, may have been the least conservative of the lot. He was the compromise candidate to gain the solid support of the moderate Bush republicans for what promised to be a bruising battle.
Thank you.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]