Episodic Memory
DRM False Memory Task
Also called: Deese-Roediger-McDermott paradigm, DRM paradigm, DRM lists
Measure false memory: lists of related words, then an old or new test that includes the related word no list showed.
9-12 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 284
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 6
What it measures
Measures false memory. Participants study 8 lists of related words, then judge whether test words were shown, including a related word that never was.
Constructs
- False memory
- Associative activation
- Source monitoring
- Episodic memory
Research uses
- False memory and memory distortion research
- Aging and memory research
- Within-study comparison of memory accuracy
How the paradigm works
The DRM false memory task measures false memory: remembering words that were never shown. Participants study 8 lists of 12 English words, one word every 1.5 seconds. Each list holds associates of one critical word, such as sparrow, robin and feathers for bird, but the critical word itself is never shown. After each list comes 20 seconds of true-or-false arithmetic or, as a setting, typed recall of the list. Which 8 of the 12 lists are studied, and their order, are drawn for each session.
More about the paradigm
In the recognition test, participants see 48 words one at a time and choose Old or New, without a time limit. The test follows Roediger and McDermott (1995): the words at positions 1, 8 and 10 of each studied list, the critical word of each studied list, and the same kinds of words from the 4 lists that were not studied, which give the baseline. As a setting, each Old answer is followed by a remember or know judgment. The word lists were written for this task from free association norms.
The main score is false recognition: the share of critical words of studied lists called old. In Roediger and McDermott's study it came close to the hit rate for studied words. Corrected false recognition subtracts the share of critical words of unstudied lists called old. Hit rate, false alarms, d-prime, remember shares and, with recall on, critical intrusions are also reported. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- False Recognition%
- Share of critical words of studied lists called old.
- Higher means more false memory
- Hit Rate%
- Share of studied words called old.
- Higher is better
- List False Alarms%
- Share of words from unstudied lists called old.
- Lower is better
- Critical Word Baseline%
- Share of critical words of unstudied lists called old.
- Baseline for false recognition
- Corrected False Recognition%
- False recognition minus the critical word baseline.
- Higher means more false memory caused by the lists
- d-Primed'
- z(hit rate) minus z(list false-alarm rate), with the log-linear correction.
- Higher means better memory for studied words
- Remember Share, Studied Words%
- Share of Old answers to studied words followed by Remember (remember or know setting).
- Context for recollection
- Remember Share, Critical Words%
- Share of Old answers to critical words followed by Remember (remember or know setting).
- Higher means more vivid false memories
- List Words Recalled%
- Share of list words recalled after each list (free recall setting).
- Higher is better
- Critical Intrusions%
- Share of lists whose critical word was typed in recall (free recall setting).
- Higher means more false recall
- Earlier List Intrusionscount
- Words of earlier lists typed in recall (free recall setting).
- Context for recall scores
- Other Intrusionscount
- Typed words from no list (free recall setting).
- Context for recall scores
- Median Answer Timems
- Median time of old or new answers; answers under 100 ms are left out.
- Context for the answers
Use and evidence
284 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 4% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 89 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 55 |
| 2024 | 51 |
| 2023 | 55 |
| 2022 | 58 |
| 2021 | 65 |
| 2020 | 50 |
| 2019 | 58 |
| 2018 | 56 |
| 2017 | 60 |
| 2016 | 49 |
| 2015 | 50 |
| 2014 | 42 |
| 2013 | 57 |
| 2012 | 52 |
| 2011 | 75 |
| 2010 | 49 |
| 2009 | 47 |
| 2008 | 48 |
| 2007 | 56 |
| 2006 | 48 |
| 2005 | 29 |
| 2004 | 31 |
| 2003 | 14 |
| 2002 | 16 |
| 2001 | 12 |
| 2000 | 3 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 3
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 32
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 6
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Lists
- 12 lists of 12 common English words, each made of associates of a critical word that is never shown, strongest associate first. 8 lists are studied and 4 give the baseline, chosen from the session's seed.
- Study
- One word every 1,500 ms (standard; 1,000 to 3,000), the last 250 ms blank, in list order. Each list starts with a key press.
- After each list
- 20 seconds (standard; 10 to 60) of true-or-false arithmetic, or as a setting 90 seconds (standard; 30 to 150) of typed free recall.
- Practice
- A list of 4 unrelated words, then 4 test words, each answer followed by feedback for 1,500 ms.
- Test
- 48 words, one at a time, answered Old or New without a time limit: the words at positions 1, 8 and 10 of each studied list, the critical word of each studied list, and the same words and critical words of the unstudied lists. No more than 4 old or new words in a row, and no two words of one list next to each other.
- Remember or know
- As a setting, each Old answer is followed by Remember (the moment the word appeared is recalled) or Know (the word was there but the moment is not recalled).
The word lists were written for this task from free association norms; no published DRM list is used. The words are English.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: drm_false_memory_test from the scored run, one old or new answer per word, with the remember or know judgments, free recall and break answers from the same run. Accuracy is not judged against chance over all words, because calling critical words old is what the test measures. Instead, words from unstudied lists called old significantly more often than studied words (one-sided Fisher exact test, p < .05) invalidate, and studied words not called old more often than unstudied words beyond chance are flagged. The same answer on 90% of the words invalidates. Answers under 200 ms on at least half of 4 or more answered words invalidate. No words typed in any free recall period, no arithmetic answered in the breaks, or break arithmetic at or below chance over at least 10 answers is flagged for review. A session run in another language is flagged. A hidden tab is also flagged.
Why these rules
Half the test words were studied and half were not, and the critical words are the not-studied words that are expected to be called old, so accuracy over all words does not measure engagement. Studied words and words from unstudied lists separate memory from guessing: Responses concentrated on trials that needed none (one-sided Fisher exact test, p < .05) mean the instructions were reversed and invalidate; responses that do not separate the two trial types are flagged. The same answer for nearly every word means studied and unstudied words were not told apart. An answer under 200 ms is faster than a simple visual reaction, so it cannot reflect the item. Following response-time effort screening for untimed tests (Wise and Kong 2005), the session is invalid only when at least half the answers are that fast. Typing nothing in every recall period, or skipping the break arithmetic, means that part of the procedure may not have been followed, so it is flagged. The word lists are English. A session run in another language shows English words to a participant who may not read English fluently, so it is flagged for review. A hidden tab lets the word lists and timers run without the participant, so it is flagged.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Time per word (ms) | 1,500 | 1,000 to 3,000 |
| Free recall after each list | Off | On or off |
| Free recall time per list (seconds) | 90 | 30 to 150 |
| Arithmetic break after each list (seconds) | 20 | 10 to 60 |
| Remember or know after each old answer | Off | On or off |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Instructions and screens: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. Words and sentences: English.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the DRM False Memory Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Roediger & McDermott, 1995), with the standard settings (time per word (ms): 1,500; free recall after each list: Off; free recall time per list (seconds): 90; arithmetic break after each list (seconds): 20; remember or know after each old answer: Off). The main score was false recognition (share of critical words of studied lists called old).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 803-814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803
- Deese, J. (1959). On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(1), 17-22. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046671
- Gallo, D. A. (2010). False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion. Memory & Cognition, 38(7), 833-848. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.7.833
- Gardiner, J. M. (1988). Functional aspects of recollective experience. Memory & Cognition, 16(4), 309-313. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197041
Source papers
- Roediger HL, McDermott KB (1995). Creating false memories: remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4):803-814.Paradigm source, Young adults
- Deese J (1959). On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(1):17-22.Paradigm source, Young adults
- Gallo DA (2010). False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion. Memory & Cognition, 38(7):833-848.Paradigm source, Mixed
- Nelson DL, McEvoy CL, Schreiber TA (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3):402-407.Paradigm source, Young adults
Questions
How long does the DRM False Memory Task take?
About 9 to 12 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
False Recognition, Hit Rate, List False Alarms, Critical Word Baseline, Corrected False Recognition, d-Prime, Remember Share, Studied Words, Remember Share, Critical Words, List Words Recalled, Critical Intrusions, Earlier List Intrusions, Other Intrusions and Median Answer Time. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the DRM False Memory Task used in research?
284 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 4% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 89 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the DRM False Memory Task have?
In the published research, 3 papers report its test-retest reliability and 6 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Time per word (ms) (1,000 to 3,000), free recall after each list (On or off), free recall time per list (seconds) (30 to 150), arithmetic break after each list (seconds) (10 to 60) and remember or know after each old answer (On or off). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
The instructions and screens are in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. The words and sentences stay in English, so sessions in other languages are flagged for review. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.