Critique of "Memory Lane and Morality"

808 Words4 Pages
The experiment “Memory Lane and Morality: How Childhood Memories Promote Prosocial Behavior” conducted by Francesca Gino and Desai is a study that analyzes the relationship between prosocial behavior in adults and their reminiscence of childhood. This piece contains four experiments that test multiple aspects of the question, “can the moral purity associated with one’s childhood be effective in amplifying one’s prosocial behavior?” While the subject matter holds some validity to it and there is correlation between reminiscing on one’s childhood and acting prosocially as a result, I have some reservations on the way the study was conducted ranging from the representative sample, the feasibility, the narrowness, and the practicality. The study did present some questions that I believe to be worthwhile and that would be interesting to investigate, however I do believe that were many general flaws in the study itself. Firstly, the experiment was a bit unpractical in sorts, because in a way it created an artificial situation and made it hard to distinguish what would happen realistically. The likelihood of the contemplation of one’s childhood before being summoned to act in a prosocial way is slim. Another objection with all the experiments in the study is that it is assumed that all of the participants have fond and innocent memories of their childhood. A person who had experienced a tougher childhood or was forced to grow up quickly, is less prone to having responded in a participatory way after having reminiscing their childhood. Although this was investigated in experiment four, I do hold true to these reservations and believe it was consistently flawed. Another dilemma I had with the study is the fact that self-report data is often unreliable. The unreliability existed in experiments one and two in which the participants were requested to perform another task at
Open Document