Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain
While memories may fade with time, the explanations people give for why they remember an event remain surprisingly stable and reliable, according to a new study by Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.
The research shows that when a memory is successfully retrieved, the verbal justification supporting it remains rich, detailed, and consistent—even after a delay of 24 hours. The findings were published in Communications Psychology.
The study was led by Dr. Talya Sadeh, together with doctoral researchers Avi Gamoran and Zohar Raz Groman, from the Department of Cognitive and Brain Sciences at Ben-Gu…
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain
While memories may fade with time, the explanations people give for why they remember an event remain surprisingly stable and reliable, according to a new study by Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.
The research shows that when a memory is successfully retrieved, the verbal justification supporting it remains rich, detailed, and consistent—even after a delay of 24 hours. The findings were published in Communications Psychology.
The study was led by Dr. Talya Sadeh, together with doctoral researchers Avi Gamoran and Zohar Raz Groman, from the Department of Cognitive and Brain Sciences at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. The team examined memory justifications—the explanations people provide for why a remembered event truly occurred.
Memory justifications play a critical social role. When people share memories, the justifications they offer are used by others to assess credibility, including in contexts such as testimony, investigations, and professional reporting.
To examine how time affects these justifications, the researchers studied 421 participants aged 18 to 35, who completed memory recall tasks after short (90 seconds) and long (24 hours) delays. More than 4,000 written memory justifications were collected and analyzed using both linguistic and behavioral methods.
As expected, participants remembered significantly fewer items after a one-day delay. However, for items that were successfully remembered, the content of the justifications showed remarkable stability. The level of detail, vocabulary use, and structure of the explanations remained almost identical across both time points.
"When memory was retrieved, its justification stayed rich and well-organized," said Raz Groman. "Time reduced access to memory, but not the quality of the explanation when recall succeeded."
The only change observed over time was a slight increase in hedging language—such as words expressing uncertainty—but this shift affected expression rather than the memory content itself. Importantly, linguistic analysis showed that justification content predicted memory credibility better than participants’ self-reported confidence.
The findings support an "all-or-nothing" model of forgetting: either a memory is retrieved along with a stable justification, or it is not retrieved at all.
"Our results suggest that memory justifications provide a temporally stable window into episodic memory," said Dr. Sadeh. "In legal or forensic contexts, where testimony often relies on delayed recall, encouraging written justifications may offer a more reliable basis for evaluating memory credibility than confidence alone."
Publication details
Avi Gamoran et al, Memory justifications provide valid indicators of retrieval accuracy across time, Communications Psychology (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s44271-025-00378-4
Journal information: Communications Psychology
Key medical concepts
Citation: Memory justifications remain surprisingly stable even as memories fade over time, study shows (2026, January 20) retrieved 20 January 2026 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-01-memory-justifications-stable-memories.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.