The nature and relationships among various types of memory errors have long been a topic of debate in psychology and philosophy. While some progress has been made in taxonomizing memory errors, there remains a lack of consensus on how to define and distinguish among phenomena such as misremembering, confabulation, and relearning.
Recently, Sarah Robins proposed a taxonomy of memory errors based on the causal theory of memory, which sees successful remembering as involving a causal connection between a retrieved memory representation and an earlier experience. According to Robins' causalist taxonomy, memory errors can be classified in terms of two conditions: the accuracy of the memory representation and the retention of information from the earlier experience. Successful remembering occurs when both conditions are met. Misremembering occurs when information is retained but the memory representation is inaccurate. Confabulation occurs when the memory representation is inaccurate and no information is retained. Finally, relearning is said to occur when the representation is accurate but no information is retained.
In a new paper, Kourken Michaelian argues that while Robins' taxonomy has intuitive appeal, it faces several problems and is ultimately inadequate. Instead, Michaelian develops an alternative taxonomy based on the simulation theory of memory. Simulationism sees remembering as a constructive process that need not involve the retention of information from an earlier experience. On this view, remembering is more like imagining the past than retrieving a stored representation.
Michaelian's simulationist taxonomy distinguishes among memory errors in terms of three conditions:
1. Accuracy - whether the memory representation is accurate with respect to the past event
2. Reliability - whether the memory process tends to produce mostly accurate representations
3. Internality - whether the subject contributes content to the memory representation
Successful remembering occurs when all three conditions are met. The taxonomy then classifies memory errors based on different combinations of these conditions:
- Misremembering: the reliability and internality conditions are met but the accuracy condition is not. The memory process is functioning properly but happens to produce an inaccurate representation on a particular occasion.
- Veridical confabulation: the accuracy condition is met but the reliability and internality conditions are not. The confabulatory process produces an accurate representation by chance.
- Falsidical confabulation: none of the three conditions are met. The confabulatory process produces an inaccurate representation.
- Veridical relearning: the accuracy condition is met but the internality condition is not. The subject acquires an accurate representation from an external source without contributing any content himself.
- Falsidical relearning: the accuracy and internality conditions are not met. The subject acquires an inaccurate representation from an external source.
Michaelian argues this taxonomy better captures the relationships among memory errors and aligns with the constructive, simulational nature of remembering. It provides a plausible account of phenomena like veridical confabulation and falsidical relearning that the causalist taxonomy struggles to accommodate.
The simulationist taxonomy may require further development and refinement. The role of metacognitive error in confabulation and other memory errors remains to be fully worked out. Errors of omission like forgetting also need to be incorporated. Nevertheless, this taxonomy provides a promising new framework for making sense of the complexities of unsuccessful remembering and the constructive character of memory.
