Browsing Research from April 2016 by Journal
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
Disowned recollections: denying true experiences undermines belief in occurrence but not judgments of rememberingRecent research findings have illustrated that false memories induced in the laboratory can be dissociated from the beliefs that the events had in fact occurred. In this study we assessed whether this dissociability is a quality peculiar to false memory, or whether it represents a general characteristic of autobiographical memory. To this end we examined whether people can be induced to stop believing in memories for true experiences. Participants observed and performed simple actions, and were later falsely informed that they had not performed some of them-that false memories for these actions had been implanted through the use of fabricated evidence. Before and after receiving this misinformation, participants rated their belief in and memory of performing those actions, other actions that they had also performed, and actions that they had not performed. Whereas the misinformation substantially undermined participants' beliefs in the specific performed actions about which they had been misinformed, it had little effect on their endorsement of remembering those actions. The misinformation thus boosted the proportion of occasions in which participants rated their memories as stronger than their beliefs, and it weakened the correlation between belief and memory ratings. Thus, this study provides the first experimental demonstration of non-believed memories of true experiences. We discuss our findings with reference to the small literature concerning the use of socially-communicated misinformation to undermine event memories, and with reference to the structure of autobiographical memory. © 2013 Elsevier B.V.
Using behavioural science in public health settings during the COVID-19 pandemic: the experience of public health practitioners and behavioural scientistsIntroduction The emergence of COVID-19 and the importance of behaviour change to limit its spread created an urgent need to apply behavioural science to public health. Knowledge mobilisation, the processes whereby research leads to useful findings that are implemented to affect positive outcomes, is a goal for researchers, policy makers and practitioners alike. This study aimed to explores the experience of using behavioural science in public health during COVID-19, to discover barriers and facilitators and whether the rapidly changing context of COVID-19 influenced knowledge mobilisation. Methods We conducted a semi-structured interview study, with ten behavioural scientists and seven public health professionals in England, Scotland, Wales, The Netherlands and Canada. We conducted an inductive thematic analysis. Results We report three key themes and 10 sub-themes: 1.Challenges and facilitators of translation of behavioural science into public health (Methods and frameworks supported translation, Lack of supportive infrastructure, Conviction and sourcing of evidence and Embracing behavioural science) 2. The unique context of translation (Rapid change in context, the multi-disciplinary team and the emotional toll). 3. Recommendations to support future behavioural science translation (Embedding experts into teams, Importance of a collaborative network and showcasing the role of behavioural science). Discussion Barriers and facilitators included factors related to relationships between people, such as networks and teams; the expertise of individual people; and those related to materials, such as the use of frameworks and an overwhelming amount of evidence and literature. Conclusion People and frameworks were seen as important in facilitating behavioural science in practice. Future research could explore how different frameworks are used. We recommend a stepped competency framework for behavioural science in public health and more focus on nurturing networks to facilitate knowledge mobilisation in future emergencies.