Effects of Statement Type and Study Context on Memory for Truth and Falsity

Are people better at remembering the truth or falsity of information? Due to inconsistent results in the literature, three experiments investigated the role of statement type and study context as potential moderators. Experiments 1 and 2 examined memory for veracity feedback with comparative statements and definitions—varying within or between participants. Experiment 3 focused on the impact of instructed study goals (preparing for a quiz show vs. learning a foreign language) on participants’ memory for veracity feedback. The results indicated that statement type and study context influenced memory for “true” and “false” feedback. For comparative statements, participants showed symmetric memory for truth and falsity. For definitions, on the other hand, participants remembered truth better than falsity, but only when the statement type was manipulated between participants.Furthermore, this effect was amplified by the study instructions. Taken together, these findings challenge traditional models on the mental representation of truth and falsity, which propose a rigid encoding of “false” tags (and “true” tags, respectively). Instead, the results argue for an optional encoding of “true” and “false” tags, which is shaped by the informational value of the different types of veracity feedback in a given study context.