💱Misattribution of Memory

Creation and development process of Misattribution of Memory bias Ontology

OWL file of the ontology

Visualize the ontology with WebVOWL

Visualization using OWLGrEd

Contextualization

This page contains the docs for the misattribution of memory bias, it is a comprehensive bias as presented on wikipedia, it contains the other three (more documentation in the subpages), it was a peculiar case.

ChatGPT exploratory conversation

Give me a definition of “Misattribution of memory”ChatGPT

Misattribution of memory refers to a cognitive error where a person incorrectly recalls the source of a memory, such as the time, place, person, or circumstances involved with the memory. This can involve attributing a memory to the wrong source, believing that a dream or thought was a real memory, or incorrectly remembering the context in which a memory was acquired. Misattribution is one of several types of memory errors categorized under the umbrella of source monitoring errors, which involve difficulties in determining the origins of memories. It plays a significant role in various psychological phenomena and can impact eyewitness testimony, recognition tasks, and everyday memory recollections.

Now give me 10 example scenarios of “Misattribution of memory”

1. Witness Misidentification: An eyewitness to a crime mistakenly identifies a person as the perpetrator because they saw that person's face in a different context, such as on social media or in a lineup, not at the scene of the crime.

2. False Authorship: A person believes they came up with an original idea or joke, when in fact they heard it from someone else but forgot the source, leading to unintentional plagiarism.

3. Cryptomnesia: An author writes a story or a musician composes a song thinking it's original, but it's actually a forgotten memory of someone else's work they encountered previously.

4. Misremembered Events: Someone recalls attending a family event or a public event (like a concert or sports game) and details of the event vividly, only to find out they weren't actually there but had heard about it from others or seen it on TV.

5. Deja Vu: Experiencing a strong sensation that an event or experience currently being experienced has already been experienced in the past, when it hasn't.

6. False Memories in Therapy: In some cases, suggestive therapeutic techniques might lead individuals to form vivid memories of events that never occurred, such as past abuses or trauma.

7. Misattributed Emotions: Believing that the excitement from an unrelated event, like a roller coaster ride, is actually attraction towards someone you met there, due to the misattribution of the arousal's source.

8. Dream Confusion: Confusing events or conversations from dreams with real-life events, thinking that something that happened in a dream actually happened in reality.

9. Educational Content Confusion: A student might remember the gist of a historical event or scientific theory but attribute it to the wrong source, like a different textbook, lecture, or even a movie.

10. Familiar Stranger: Seeing someone in public and feeling certain you know them from somewhere, when in reality, they only resemble or remind you of someone else, or you've seen them in passing multiple times without direct interaction.

Now create a user story for “False Authorship” scenario

User Story: Jamie's Accidental Plagiarism

Background: Jamie is an aspiring novelist with a passion for crafting intricate stories that blend elements of mystery and fantasy. They've always prided themselves on their originality and dedication to creating unique plots and characters. For years, Jamie has maintained notebooks filled with ideas, sketches, and snippets of dialogue, dreaming of the day they'd finally publish their first novel.

Incident: One evening, while rummaging through old notebooks, Jamie stumbled upon a concept they'd scribbled down years ago but had completely forgotten about. It was a brilliant plot twist that could perfectly resolve the stagnant story arc in their current manuscript. Excitedly, Jamie integrated the idea into their novel, refining it to fit seamlessly with the existing narrative.

A few months later, after self-publishing their novel, Jamie started receiving accolades from readers. However, the praise was soon overshadowed by a concerning email from a reader. The email pointed out striking similarities between Jamie's plot twist and a popular fantasy novel published several years prior—a novel Jamie had read and enjoyed but had not consciously remembered when they found their old notes.

Realization: Confused and alarmed, Jamie revisited the mentioned novel and was horrified to discover the similarities. The plot twist, which Jamie believed had sprung from their own creativity, was indeed very similar to the one in the other author's book. It dawned on Jamie that their "original" idea was actually a forgotten memory of the other story, not a product of their own imagination.

Outcome: Jamie immediately took to their blog and social media to explain the situation, acknowledging the unintentional plagiarism and expressing their sincere apologies to both the original author and their readers. They also contacted the original author to explain the misattribution of memory and discuss how to make amends, such as donating a portion of their sales to a charity of the author's choice.

Reflection: This incident was a humbling experience for Jamie. They realized the importance of keeping detailed records of their inspiration sources and regularly reviewing the originality of their ideas against existing works. Jamie also began participating in writing workshops and forums to discuss the challenges of distinguishing between inspiration and memory, aiming to help other writers navigate the complexities of creative originality.

Future Steps: Determined to move forward, Jamie decided to focus on their next project, this time with a heightened awareness of the intricacies of memory and creativity. They also pledged to use this experience as a learning opportunity, not just for themselves but as a cautionary tale for the broader creative community about the potential pitfalls of misattribution of memory.

Now, if you should make an ontology of the "Misattribution of memory", what classes and properties would you create?

Creating an ontology for "Misattribution of Memory" involves defining a structured framework that captures the concepts and relationships relevant to misattribution phenomena in memory. Here's a basic outline of what such an ontology might include, focusing on classes (concepts) and properties (relationships and attributes).

Classes (Concepts):

1. MemoryEvent

   • Description: A specific instance of memory recall that involves potential misattribution.

   • Subclasses: ActualMemory, MisattributedMemory

2. ActualMemory

   • Description: The original event as it actually happened.

   • Properties: EventDetails, Source, Time, Participants

3. MisattributedMemory

   • Description: The incorrectly recalled or attributed memory.

   • Properties: PerceivedEventDetails, MisattributedSource, MisattributionType

4. Person

   • Description: An individual who experiences or is involved in a MemoryEvent.

   • Properties: Name, Age, Role (e.g., witness, victim, perpetrator)

5. MisattributionType

   • Description: The category of misattribution error.

   • Instances: Source Misattribution, Cryptomnesia, False Recognition, etc.

6. EventDetails

   • Description: Specifics about an event, including what, where, and how.

   • Properties: Location, Time, Participants, Actions

7. Source

   • Description: The origin of a memory or information.

   • Properties: Type (e.g., personal experience, media, hearsay), Identifier (e.g., person, book, video)

Properties (Relationships and Attributes):

1. hasEventDetails

   • Domain: MemoryEvent

   • Range: EventDetails

2. hasActualSource

   • Domain: ActualMemory

   • Range: Source

3. hasMisattributedSource

   • Domain: MisattributedMemory

   • Range: Source

4. experiencesMemoryEvent

   • Domain: Person

   • Range: MemoryEvent

5. hasMisattributionType

   • Domain: MisattributedMemory

   • Range: MisattributionType

6. involvesPerson

   • Domain: EventDetails

   • Range: Person

7. occursAtTime

   • Domain: EventDetails

   • Range: Time (DateTime)

8. occursAtLocation

   • Domain: EventDetails

   • Range: Location (String or structured location data)

Class and Properties we used

Classes:

• cbi:MisattributedMemory; Describes a generic Misattribution of Memory

Properties:

• cbi:generatedBy; Describes the relation between a bias and the source from which it starts or come from

Chosen Framester Frames

• People (https://w3id.org/framester/data/framestercore/People)

This frame contains general words for Individuals, i.e. humans. The Person is conceived of as independent of other specific individuals with whom they have relationships and independent of their participation in any particular activity. They may have an Age, Descriptor, Origin, Persistent_characteristic, or Ethnicity. A man from Phoenix was shot yesterday. She gave birth to a screaming baby yesterday. I study 16-year-old female adolescents. I am dating an African-American man. She comforted the terrified child. I always thought of him as a stupid man.

• Event (http://etna.istc.cnr.it/framester2/data/framestercore/Event)

An Event takes place at a Place and Time. Big earthquakes only happen along plate boundaries. INI The party will take place on Sunday in the all-you-can-eat buffet.

Other ontologies used

rdfs:subClassOf; The subject is a subclass of a class.