A false memory trap: Verbatim vs gist memories on trial

Abstract

Research shows that memory for conversation is poor. People generally remember gist rather than verbatim and recalled memories of specific sentences are reconstructed to reflect gist memories. Memories of specific sentences that are reconstructed from gist memory are almost certainly not accurate. This study explores a case in which the court nevertheless considers verbatim memories to hold more weight than gist memories, despite the science that shows otherwise. It is suggested that greater research be done into how such evidence is dealt with in our courts, and whether juries should be instructed to be wary of verbatim memories for conversation.