On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 08:35:01 -0700, Manza, Louis wrote: >Or he's just covering his a** and lying about his lack of memory; >but it IS a good topic for a discussion on memory . . .
In response to Michael Sylvester who wrote: > I believe that Hermain Cain's fading and emerging memories >are good examples of the reconstructive aspects of long term memory. >Where is Elizabeth Loftus? This could be a topic for class discussion. Okay, a couple of points: (1) It is always a treacherous exercise to explain the memory and cognition of a person (a) one has never met, (b) where one has little objective evidence about the facts of the situation that one is trying to remember (i.e., how does one know what is an accurate memory from a distorted or made-up memory), (c) the overall cognitive/intellectual and memory functioning of the person doing the remembering (i.e., is the inability to recall this situation consistent with the person's cognitive and memory abilities), and (d) a measure of the extent to which the person is engaging in mendacity, that is, crafting a self-serving response that changes as needed to take into account new evidence/facts (especially if it contradicts earlier statements about memory). If one is just BS'ing about the nature of memory, then, sure, one can meaninglessly speculate about what is happening with Herman Cain but remember that as the facts come out, the degrees of freedoms will be reduced and the number of possible explanations will reduce in number. (2) The situation that is most relevant to the Herman Cain's is the plea that Lewis "Scooter" Libby made about the Valerie Plame case, in which he was found guilty of obstruction and justice and perjury. "Scooter" also had "memory problems" and even used this point to raise funds; see: http://www.scooterlibby.org/news/Read.aspx?ID=136 I have to admit that when I followed this case back in the day, I was personally disappointed that memory researchers participated in "Scooter's" defense. To get a sense of the role memory researchers played in this, consider this page from www.historycommons.org : http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=robert_bjork_1 Briefly, Dan Schacter was first used as a memory consultant who would have had to testify, next Robert Bjork was brought in but the prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald opposed it, which led to having Elizabeth Loftus being called in to testify in support of having Bjork testify. Near the bottom of the above mentioned webpage, the entry for October 26, 2006, Fitzgerald has Beth Loftus on the stand where she is supposed to bolster the argument that Bjork should be allowed to testify on Libby's behalf. Fitzgerald takes her apart on the stand. I'll leave it to the reader as to whether Loftus embarrassed herself on the stand. In the end, Bjork was not allowed to testify. In the final entry at the above webpage, we have the following comment by the judge: |Walton finds that Bjork’s testimony would be a “waste of time,” |and could mislead and confuse a jury. Libby’s attorneys had argued |that many jurors have a false impression of how memory works, and |a “memory expert” could clarify the matter for them. But Walton |writes, “[T]he average juror may not understand the scientific basis |and labels attached to causes for memory error.” However, jurors |encounter the “frailties of memory” as a “commonplace matter of |course” and do not need the guidance of a memory expert to use |their “common sense” in the understanding of how memory works. |“[T]he jury, for themselves, can assess whether a witness’s recollection |of an earlier conversation is accurate.” So, we learned something today. And that is, no matter how much of an expert one is, don't argue with someone who is much better than you is an argument/debate, especially in open court. (3) To repeat a point: learn what the facts are first before one should talk about the accuracy of memory and the processes associated with it. -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=13844 or send a blank email to leave-13844-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
