The Mandela effect tricks our brains with false memories. Is AI making it worse? - National Geographic

Darth Vader never said, “Luke I am your father.” Your favorite children’s book series was the Berenstain Bears, not the Berenstein Bears. The cow on Laughing Cow cheese never actually had a nose ring. These examples illustrate a phenomenon known as the Mandela effect, where the public collectively misremembers an image, event, or phrase.

The term Mandela effect was coined in 2009 by paranormal researcher Fiona Broome, who noticed that many people shared a false memory about the death of South African President Nelson Mandela. Mandela died in 2013 from a lung infection, but many people falsely remember that he died while in prison in the 1980s for fighting against apartheid. Since then, examples of the Mandela effect have proliferated, aided by social media, which has helped bring together individuals who share these false memories. Wilma Bainbridge, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Chicago, notes that millennial childhoods are often fertile ground for this effect, particularly among heavy social media users on platforms like Instagram or Reddit.

These altered memories are typically harmless, yet they can lead to doubt about our own memories and even our sense of reality. Scientific studies of the Mandela effect are still relatively new, but researchers have been investigating the creation of false memories for decades. Aileen Oeberst, a professor of social psychology at the University of Potsdam in Germany, explains that the brain uses the same area—the hippocampus—for both imagination and memory storage. This overlap suggests significant implications for false memories. Research indicates that if people repeatedly imagine something, they may eventually believe they actually experienced it.

When recalling a memory, the brain reconstructs it rather than replaying it like a video, making it susceptible to misremembering. Individuals might fill in gaps with details they expect to be true or filter memories through an emotionally charged lens, leading to altered recollections. Memories that are novel, emotional, and self-relevant are particularly vulnerable to these changes, according to Oeberst.

However, Bainbridge's research indicates that the explanations for false memories don’t fully account for the Mandela effect. In her 2022 study, she and co-author Deepasri Prasad found that Mandela effect memories can form even contrary to stereotypes. They examined people’s reactions to various icons, such as Curious George or Pikachu’s tails, and the Fruit of the Loom logo. For instance, many people falsely remember a cornucopia surrounding the Fruit of the Loom logo, despite the actual logo featuring only fruit on a white background.

Bainbridge and Prasad's research did not definitively identify what makes certain icons or events more susceptible to the Mandela effect, but they noted that simple images with a few distinctive features tend to be more memorable. They also found that misremembered details about these images remain consistent and strengthen with repetition. Looking ahead, Bainbridge is interested in studying what makes an image memorable and potentially reverse engineering that to create new Mandela effects.

The risk of solidifying false memories through repeated exposure is particularly concerning in the context of AI-generated misinformation. Prasad warns that misinformation, especially when presented repeatedly as truth, could lead to the creation of false memories or at least cause individuals to doubt the validity of their own memories. The viral image of the late Pope Francis wearing a giant Balenciaga puffer jacket serves as a contemporary example of how easily misinformation can spread and be misremembered.

Paranormal Country has not confirmed the details of this phenomenon.