Can pupillometry distinguish accurate from inaccurate familiarity?

False memory-guided eye movements: insights from a DRM-Saccade paradigm

The Deese-Roediger and McDermott (DRM) paradigm and visually guided saccade tasks are both prominent research tools in their own right. This study introduces a novel DRM-Saccade paradigm, merging both methodologies. We used rule-based saccadic eye movements whereby participants were presented with items at test and were asked to make a saccade to the left or right of the item to denote a recognition or non-recognition decision. We measured old/new recognition decisions and saccadic latencies. Experiment 1 used a pro/anti saccade task to a single target. We found slower saccadic latencies for correct rejection of critical lures, but no latency difference between correct recognition of studied items and false recognition of critical lures. Experiment 2 used a two-target saccade task and also measured corrective saccades. Findings corroborated those from Experiment 1. Participants adjusted their initial decisions to increase accurate recognition of studied items and rejection of unrelated lures but there were no such corrections for critical lures. We argue that rapid saccades indicate cognitive processing driven by familiarity thresholds. These occur before slower source-monitoring is able to process any conflict. The DRM-Saccade task could effectively track real-time cognitive resource use during recognition decisions.

Pupil response patterns distinguish true from false memories

Memory is reconstructive and error-prone, which make memory illusions very common in everyday life. However, studying memory illusions can provide valuable insights into how memory works. Pupil response has emerged, in recent years, as an indicator of memory encoding and retrieval, however its validity as a measure of memory success is debated. In this study, we explored whether pupil response patterns can differentiate true from false memories and whether variations in the temporal dynamics of pupil response can elucidate the mechanisms underlying false memory creation. The Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm was employed to generate false memories in two separate experiments involving visual and auditory stimuli. Pupil responses effectively differentiated true from false memories based on variations in pupil amplitude at different temporal components. This discrimination remained consistent across both experiments, with slightly stronger effects in the auditory condition, aligning with the more pronounced false memory effects in this condition. Notably, differential pupil responses between true and false memories varied based on the type of memory involved at recognition. These findings provide valuable insights into the cognitive processes underlying memory distortions, with implications for theoretical frameworks and real-world contexts.