The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Memory for randomly sampled autobiographical events
Abstract
This chapter describes two empirical studies of autobiographical memory that focused on the personal memory component of autobiographical memory. These experiments investigated the characteristics of randomly sampled events and of events that subjects selected to be memorable. The autobiographical memory data in these experiments were obtained from naive subjects, not from the experimenter. Both experiments were designed so that it would be possible to study memory for thoughts independently from memory for actions. The second experiment was designed to study cued recall of verifiable autobiographical memories, and in this experiment systematic reports were obtained of the subjects' phenomenal experiences during the recall process. The data from these two experiments were used to address a wide range of issues in the study of autobiographical memory. Memory for random events was compared with memory for subject-selected events, and memory for thoughts was compared with memory for actions. A number of analyses were carried out to uncover the relationships between the characteristics of the original events and memory for these events after various time intervals. The cued-recall data were used to study the accuracy of autobiographical recall and to work out the relations between the contents of the events and memory for the events. An analysis was carried out to study the relative effectiveness of various forms of cues for the retrieval of information from autobiographical memory. The data from the phenomenal memory scales were used to explore the subjects' experiences during the recall process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323 · Cited by 7,678
The construction of autobiographical memories in the self-memory system
Conway, M. A., & Pleydell-Pearce, C. W. (2000) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.107.2.261 · Cited by 4,089
Conway, M. A. (2005) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.005 · Cited by 2,155
Belief and recollection of autobiographical memories
Rubin, D. C., Schrauf, R. W., & Greenberg, D. L. (2003) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03196443 · Cited by 612
Confabulation and the control of recollection
Burgess, P. W. (1996) · Memory · doi:10.1080/096582196388906 · Cited by 509
Metadata
- Authors
- Brewer, W. F.
- Venue
- Remembering Reconsidered
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1988-06-24
- Pages
- 21-90
- OpenAlex
- W120696173
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.40
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Memory for randomly sampled autobiographical events. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511664014.004
- The paper
- Brewer, W. F. (1988). Memory for randomly sampled autobiographical events. Remembering Reconsidered. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511664014.004
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.