Memory, whose accuracy is a pillar of common knowledge, is actually quite synthetic and unreliable for the sake of making sense of things, as several studies reviewed at the website of the American Psychological Association show. First: People make sense out of stand alone effects by thinking they “remember” seeing their probable causes —
Memory “illusions” may result from the basic human need to make
sense out of events. A series of experiments has provided the first scientific evidence
that when people see effects (a student toppling onto the floor) without also seeing
its cause (a student leaning back in a chair), they automatically “fill in the blank” with
that probable cause — even if they haven’t actually seen it with their own two eyes.
The result: a memory that seems real, but isn’t. The inference may be correct, but
it’s not based on actual perception, suggesting that memory helps us to make sense
of the world, perhaps at the expense of a complete reliability.
And: Jurors distort evidence to favor their tentative verdict as they move through the course of a trial —
Presenting further proof that jurors are vulnerable to human error,
psychologists … found significant
evidence of a deep bias affecting both students and prospective jurors…, hypothesiz(ing) that “predecisional distortion” of new information
could cause a juror to evaluate trial evidence with a bias toward supporting
whichever party that juror currently favors. Already known to sway consumer
decisions, predecisional distortion would then bias juror decisions as well. Such a
finding could raise questions about the adequacy of conventional jury instructions to
not reach a verdict prematurely.
Sophisticated psychotherapists have known this for a long time. Clients in therapy, ‘remembering’ the past to make sense of their lives are actually synthesizing coherent stories, inventing mythologies for themselves, under the influence of a therapist whose job it is, whether consciously or unconsciously, to shape them so that they are most helpful.
