Lost in the Mall Technique

The lost in the mall technique is a memory-implantation paradigm in cognitive psychology. It examines whether people can come to describe a childhood event that never happened after receiving a plausible suggestion from a trusted older relative or researcher. The suggested event traditionally involves becoming separated from one’s family in a shopping mall during childhood, being unable to find one’s way, and later being rescued or reunited with family members. The technique is not a consumer brand or commercial enterprise; it is the name commonly applied to a line of experimental procedures and the broader research finding associated with them. The first version was devised by Jim Coan as an extra-credit project while he was an undergraduate student in Elizabeth Loftus’s cognitive psychology course. Coan prepared booklets containing four narratives about supposed childhood experiences. Three accounts were intended to describe genuine events, while one described a fabricated incident in which Coan’s younger brother had become lost in a shopping mall at approximately age five. Family members were asked to recall details over several days without being told that one account was fictional. During a recorded debriefing, Coan’s brother supplied additional details about the invented event and initially could not identify it as the false narrative. Coan later refined the procedure for his senior thesis, reporting a different pattern in which participants were able to identify the fabricated account. Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell subsequently adapted the approach in a more formal study involving 24 participants. The researchers reported that approximately one quarter of the participants developed some recollection of the suggested mall incident. These reports were generally less detailed and less vivid than accounts of genuine events, although some participants added specific details that had not appeared in the original prompt. When participants were later informed that one of the four narratives was false, five selected a genuine event rather than the lost-in-the-mall account. Loftus characterized the study as an existence proof that suggestions can become incorporated into autobiographical memory, rather than as evidence that every alleged recollection of childhood trauma is false. The technique became important in the late twentieth-century debate over recovered memories, repressed memories, and so-called false memory syndrome. Its influence came from its relatively simple demonstration that autobiographical reports can be altered by social information, source confusion, imagination, and the gradual loss of distinctions between remembered experience and suggested material. Subsequent studies replicated or modified the procedure with different ages, interviewers, and suggested events. Some work found that children may be especially susceptible to plausible suggestions, while other studies reported much lower rates for events that were more unusual, painful, embarrassing, or otherwise implausible. The paradigm has also attracted sustained criticism. Researchers and clinicians have questioned whether a plausible, relatively ordinary event such as being lost in a public place can legitimately serve as a model for repeated and traumatic experiences such as childhood sexual abuse. Critics have raised concerns about sample sizes, family-member involvement, demand characteristics, incomplete controls, and whether some participants might actually have experienced a similar event without their relatives knowing. Loftus and other defenders have responded that the studies were intended to establish the malleability of memory under particular conditions, not to resolve the truth of individual abuse allegations or demonstrate that therapeutic recovered memories are generally fabricated. The lost in the mall technique remains a widely discussed example in research on memory conformity, misinformation, source monitoring, and the construction of autobiographical memory.

The lost in the mall technique emerged from research into whether suggestion can alter autobiographical memory. Jim Coan developed the initial procedure while studying under psychologist Elizabeth Loftus. For an extra-credit assignment, Coan constructed four short accounts of childhood experiences and presented them to members of his family as material to be remembered and elaborated. One account was invented: it described Coan’s brother becoming lost in a shopping mall at about five years of age, receiving help from an older person, and eventually rejoining his family. The participant was not told which narrative was fictional. Over several days, he recorded details associated with each account. In the later debriefing, he described additional features of the fabricated event and did not initially recognize it as the false account. Coan subsequently revised the study for his senior thesis and reported that participants in that version could identify the invented narrative. Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell adapted the approach in a published study involving 24 participants. Each person received information about four childhood events, three of which were represented as genuine and one of which was the lost-in-the-mall incident. Approximately 25 percent of participants reported some memory of the suggested event. Their accounts were generally less elaborate than their descriptions of genuine experiences, but some participants generated details beyond those supplied by the researchers. At the final identification stage, five participants incorrectly selected a true event as the false one. The results were presented as evidence that plausible suggestions can be integrated into autobiographical memory and later confused with direct experience. The method became prominent during disputes about recovered memories and false memory syndrome. Its central implication was narrower than many public discussions suggested: the studies demonstrated that memory reports can be influenced under particular experimental conditions, but they did not establish that any particular childhood recollection was false. Loftus argued that participants may incorporate suggested information into existing memories of visiting malls or similar public places, with later source-monitoring failures making imagination and experience difficult to distinguish. Later research extended the paradigm by changing the age of participants, using relatives as interviewers, and testing other suggested incidents. Some findings indicated that children could be particularly responsive to plausible suggestions. Comparisons with highly implausible or embarrassing events, including medical procedures, suggested that plausibility strongly affects the likelihood of reported false recollection. Other researchers argued that these differences limit the extent to which the mall paradigm can be generalized to traumatic or repeated events. Criticism has continued across psychology, clinical practice, and legal debate. Kenneth Pope identified possible confounding variables and questioned comparisons between the experiment and therapeutic creation of alleged abuse memories. Lynn Crook and Martha Dean challenged the ethics and generalizability of the work, while Loftus replied that their account contained errors and overstated the study’s implications. A later critique by Crook and McEwen revisited study records and a deposition concerning whether participants might have experienced the event without relatives knowing. Ruth Blizard and Morgan Shaw similarly argued that the paradigm does not adequately model recovered memories of repeated sexual abuse. A later study, first circulated as a preprint and subsequently published, examined the implantation of repeated false memories and addressed part of that criticism. Despite disagreement over interpretation, the lost in the mall technique remains a standard case study in the malleability of memory and the limits of experimental generalization.

• 2020

  Research on repeated false memories

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  A study initially posted as a PsyArXiv preprint and later published in Memory examined the implantation of repeated false memories in response to criticism that the mall paradigm did not model repeated abuse memories.

• 2019

  Renewed methodological criticism

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  Crook and McEwen reexamined study information and raised questions about whether participants could have drawn on genuine experiences and whether the original findings established false-memory formation.

• 1999

  Ethical and generalizability criticism

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  Lynn Crook and Martha Dean criticized the study’s ethics, methods, and relevance to therapeutic claims involving recovered memories.

• 1995

  Loftus and Pickrell formal study

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  Elizabeth Loftus and Jacqueline Pickrell published a study of 24 participants in which approximately one quarter reported some memory of a suggested lost-in-the-mall event.

• Initial undergraduate experiment

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  Jim Coan designed the first lost-in-the-mall procedure as an extra-credit project in Elizabeth Loftus’s cognitive psychology course, using family members and one fabricated childhood narrative.

• Coan senior-thesis refinement

  [1]Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org

  Coan later refined the procedure for his senior thesis and reported that participants in that version could identify the invented event.

A controlled research paradigm for investigating suggestibility, source confusion, and the construction of autobiographical memories; it is not a commercial brand.

• Research method

  Lost-in-the-mall procedure

  A structured autobiographical-memory experiment in which participants receive several narratives about childhood events, including one plausible event that did not occur. Repeated recall, elaboration, and later debriefing are used to assess whether participants report details for the suggested event or misidentify which account was fabricated.

• Psychological research framework

  False-memory paradigm

  The broader research application associated with the technique, used to study suggestion, memory conformity, imagination inflation, source monitoring, and the incorporation of externally supplied information into personal recollection.

1. 1Lost in the mall techniqueen.wikipedia.org
2. 2Make-Believe Memoriesdoi.org