Memory egotism
Authors: Zezelj Iris 
Published: July 2018

Positive biases are evident in various forms of self-reports: academic performance or performance on tests of intelligence, athleticism and driving (Wilard &amp; Gramzow, 2009). These positive biases in autobiographic memory are often dubbed memory egotism. There are two broad contexts in which people demonstrate memory egotism (Dunning et al., 2004): (a) information deficiency: as information becomes less accessible in memory, people tend to rely on more general beliefs about themselves and reconstruct the specific information based on it (people usually hold positive self-views that – barring access to their actual score – bias estimates upward) and (b) self-enhancement motivation: when they are more motivated to hold a positive perception of themselves in a particular domain. Based on this empirical evidence, we formulated following research hypotheses: (a) People will exaggerate in reporting of their past performances; (b) They will exaggerate more if the information is less accessible in memory (the event they are reporting is older), more in a public than in a private situation, more if the attribute that is measured is central then if it is peripheral to their self-view, more if they scored low (failure) than if they scored high (success) in comparison to a particular referent group, more in case they memorize their own performance and less if they memorize a partner's performance; (c) However, memory egotism will not be reserved solely for personal performances, but for performance of in- group in comparison to out-group. (d) Exaggeration index will be positively correlated with: self-esteem, positive dominant affect, academic aspirations and global life-optimism.We conducted one field experiment and five laboratory experiments in order to test these hypotheses. A total of 558 participants (Belgrade University students and students of final year in one Belgrade high school) took part in the survey. Results across experiments showed that on average between 60% and 80% of all respondents exaggerated their scores. However, the exaggeration margin was on average around 10% of their initial grade. Respondents exaggerated more if the event was less accessible in memory (senior students more then junior when reporting their high school grades or points at the entry exam; groups tested later more then immediately tested groups). They exaggerated more if their score was low (below 50 percentile rank) then if it was high (above 85 percentile rank). There was no significant difference in exaggeration rate depending on the ego involvement, i.e. importance of attribute measured for self-image (intelligence vs. visual ability). The actors tended to over-report, while the observers tended to under-report scores on visual ability test (in one experiment) and general knowledge test (in another similar experiment). The actors were, however, more accurate in their reports than observers. Memory egotism was observed in reporting not only personal but for also in-group performances (groups that are ego-marked, such as in-groups and/or referent groups). In some experiments, there were significant, but low correlations between exaggeration score and life optimism, academic aspirations and dominant affect. These correlations, however, were not observed regularly and therefore did not allow us to conclude that better psychologically adjusted persons are more prone to self-enhancement memory biases. Overall, majority of people tend to over-report their scores, but the exaggeration rate remains in the acceptable margins, probably due to reality constraints (it seems that gist of the event needs to be preserved) (as in Kunda, 1990). People tend to over-report motivated by self- presentation (more in public then in private situations), but not only by self-presentation (they still significantly over-report in private, anonymous situations). Self-protective motive is stronger then self-affirmation motive (over-reporting is higher in the case of failure then in the case of success) (as in Sedikides &amp; Green, 2004) Accessibility in memory provokes more over-reporting. Later reports are not only less accurate, but more positively biased. It might be because reconstruction of the specific facts is based on the global self-image, especially in the domain of abilities, which is dominantly positive in majority of people (as in Kruger &amp; Dunning, 1999). Therefore, two plausible explanations for the observed effects can still be proposed: a. people deliberately exaggerate when reporting their test scores, and even anonymous situation provokes self-presentation motive (deception), or b. people reconstruct their memories of the event so that they fit better in their self-image (self-deception). The results are discussed in fuzzy trace memory theory framework. As a final conclusion, it can be said that memory egotism in form of past performance exaggeration is more a norm then it is a deviation, but its’ scope is constrained by reality.