The devil's in the g-tails: Deficient letter-shape knowledge and awareness despite massive visual experience

The Visual Mandela Effect as Evidence for Shared and Specific False Memories Across People

The Mandela effect is an Internet phenomenon describing shared and consistent false memories for specific icons in popular culture. The visual Mandela effect is a Mandela effect specific to visual icons (e.g., the Monopoly Man is falsely remembered as having a monocle) and has not yet been empirically quantified or tested. In Experiment 1 (N = 100 adults), we demonstrated that certain images from popular iconography elicit consistent, specific false memories. In Experiment 2 (N = 60 adults), using eye-tracking-like methods, we found no attentional or visual differences that drive this phenomenon. There is no clear difference in the natural visual experience of these images (Experiment 3), and these errors also occur spontaneously during recall (Experiment 4; N = 50 adults). These results demonstrate that there are certain images for which people consistently make the same false-memory error, despite the majority of visual experience being the canonical image.

Letter-Like Shape Recognition in Preschool Children: Does Graphomotor Knowledge Contribute?

Based on evidence that learning new characters through handwriting leads to better recognition than learning through typing, some authors proposed that the graphic motor plans acquired through handwriting contribute to recognition. More recently two alternative explanations have been put forward. First, the advantage of handwriting could be due to the perceptual variability that it provides during learning. Second, a recent study suggests that detailed visual analysis might be the source of the advantage of handwriting over typing. Indeed, in that study, handwriting and composition –a method requiring a detailed visual analysis but no specific graphomotor activity– led to equivalent recognition accuracy, both higher than typing. The aim of the present study was to assess whether the contribution of detailed visual analysis is observed in preschool children and to test the variability hypothesis. To that purpose, three groups of preschool children learned new symbols either by handwriting, typing, or composition. After learning, children performed first a four-alternative recognition task and then a categorization task. The same pattern of results as the one observed in adults emerged in the four-alternative recognition task, confirming the importance of the detailed visual analysis in letter-like shape learning. In addition, results failed to reveal any difference across learning methods in the categorization task. The latter results provide no evidence for the variability hypothesis which would predict better categorization after handwriting than after typing or composition.

Does the cowl make the monk? Detecting counterfeits in brand names versus logos

Companies and products are identified by their brand names, which are typically written with a specific letter style, color, and design (i.e., logos). This graphical information offers a distinctive image that facilitates their recognition. However, the uniqueness of these configuration cues may make brand names more vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling. We examined whether the confusability at detecting misspelled brand names is higher when embedded in the full logo than when presented in plain format (Experiment 1), when removing all graphical information of the logo other than typeface (Experiment 2), and when only modifying the typeface (Experiment 3). Participants had to decide whether the presented item was a correctly spelled brand name. The misspelled stimuli were created by either transposing or replacing two internal letters of popular brand names (amazon → amzaon vs. amceon), thus allowing us to have a measure of the transposed-letter confusability effect. Results showed a sizeable transposed-letter confusability effect for all types of brand names, but the effect was greatest for the misspelled full logos. Thus, the distinctiveness of the graphical information in logos has a deleterious side effect: logos are quite vulnerable to counterfeiting via misspelling branding.

Memory and availability-biased metacognitive illusions for flags of varying familiarity

Research on everyday attention suggests that frequent interaction with objects often does not benefit memory or metamemory for them. Across three experiments, participants gave confidence judgments and completed eight-alternative forced-choice tests of the US, Canadian, and Mexican flags. In Experiment 1, environmental availability was correlated with confidence for the US flag, despite similar recognition performance at a saturated time point in the US (July 4th) and a neutral time point (August 6th). In Experiment 2, participants that were asked to verbally describe the flags before judging and remembering them were less accurate and more overconfident than were controls. Experiment 3 utilized a draw-study paradigm wherein participants who first drew the flag had reliably more accurate recognition and confidence scores than those who only studied it. These findings illuminate a persistent metacognitive bias, demonstrate a powerful learning intervention, and extend theories of errorful learning by highlighting the role of attention.