Several studies have made it pretty clear nowadays the great extent to which memory is actually reconstructive, not just recollective.

The classic study (if I remember rightly) was where a researcher showed students a (colour) film in which one of the characters was wounded, and quite significantly bled oil instead of blood.

The students were quizzed after seeing the film, and all related that they had seen a black substance, perhaps oil, bleeding from this character.

When quizzed again a number of years later, many students stated that this character had gushed red blood, not oil; a couple actually recalled seeing that blood stain a white tablecloth with a red colour, even though this detail had not been in the film. What's more, they were quite clear (and quite wrong!) that this was a memory, not just a guess.

Mmm. Quirkology mentions an equivalent experiment in which they acquired some childhood photos from a friend of the test subject then photoshopped one of them to depict a fictitious ride in a hot air balloon. At first people couldn't remember the ride at all, but when asked a month later most had quite definite memories of it.

That's an interesting study, thanks.

Also, you part-capitalise your href tags! I don't think I've seen that before. Personal style, or is a utility doing that for you?

(I like the fact that only those of us who received an email notification of this comment would have known you wrote </geek> at the end of it :-)

*wink*

I never believe those, I don't think they close properly.

My father has a very good example of this - a clear memory of staying up late at night talking to someone, watching the sun set out of the window behind them. 15 years later, he stayed at the same hotel only to realise it's facing in completely the wrong direction to see a sunset or sunrise at any time of year.