<%BANNER%>

The Impact of Emotion on Memory and Misinformation Acceptance


PAGE 1

n n n n n r n r n r n r n r n n n r n n r r n r r n n n r n n n r n n r

PAGE 2

n # $ % $ & ( $ ) ) + ( % % $ % ) ) $ ( % % * % % $ $ / r ) ) $ ! $ ( 0 1 ) $ 2 3 0 ( $ ( ) ) 0 $ $ $ 0 ( ) 2 $ ( 0 4 ( % 2 $ ( % $ $ ) ' ( % 5 # $ % $ & ( $ ) ) ( % ( ' ( $ % % ( 5 $ ( 0 2 2 ) ) 2 % $ $ $ 6 $ % 2 1 3 5

PAGE 3

n n n 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 n 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 6 n r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 6 r 8 5 r r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 8 % ( % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 8 ( $ ( % $ ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 % $ & % ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 2 $ 2 $ ( 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 2 $ ( 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 : ) 4 ( % . $ % $ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 8 ) ) % 2 $ 4 4 $ % 4 + + $ ) % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 9 r $ % % ( + r $ ( $ ) ) $ $ ( ( $ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 8 ; < ( $ % $ " = % $ ( 2 % > ? ( $ % $ ( + $ % % + 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 8 @ % $ + ) % ( / 2 $ % ( 4 A # ( ) # 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 8 B ) 2 3 3 $ ( $ ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 % % 2 $ 3 ( % ( 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 C % 2 $ ) $ ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 B % ( + < % $ ( > ? 3 ( $ # 3 $ ( D 7 7 7 5 8 5 n 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 3 A $ % ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 9 E $ % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 $ ) + 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 ( $ ( $ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 B % , ) ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 5 r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9

PAGE 4

6 % ( $ % ) $ % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 9 ( + % 2 $ % 3 A $ % ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 9 B r $ $ % ) $ % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 C 9 9 5 n 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 ; $ 4 F r $ ( % % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 ; < % ) > % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 ; 9 % ( % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 ; @ ) 4 ( % % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 ; @ % % ) % ( $ ( $ % ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 : 8 ) ) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 : C r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 : : n r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 @ 8

PAGE 5

6 n 3 $ ) + $ 8 5 $ + ( 2 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 4 2 ( G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 5 5 C 5 $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 9 C 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 9 C 9 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 : C 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( . $ % $ 4 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( 0 $ ( ) % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 ) 4 ( % % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 : ; 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 B : 5 $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 C @ 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 C 8 B 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 C 8 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( . $ % $ 4 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( 0 $ ( ) % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 ) 4 ( % % G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 C

PAGE 6

6 8 8 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 C 9 8 5 $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 C ; 8 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 C : 8 9 5 $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 C @ 8 C 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( . $ % $ 4 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( 0 $ ( ) % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 ) 4 ( % % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 C B 8 ; 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 ; 8

PAGE 7

6 n r + ( $ ) + $ 8 5 $ $ 3 $ ( n $ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 C 5 $ $ 3 $ ( 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 ; 5 $ $ 3 $ ( 2 ( $ $ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 : 9 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 9 ; C 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( $ ( ) $ $ % 4 ) 4 ( % % $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 9 @ ; 5 . ( ( % $ 4 ( ) $ $ % $ ( $ I ) $ E $ ) % ) 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G % ( $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 9 B : 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 % $ ) $ 2 ) $ $ 0 3 ) 4 ( % % $ 6 $ G % 3 A $ % ) H 7 7 7 7 7 5 C @ 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ) % 3 ) 4 ( % % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 C @ B 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ; 8 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ % ( % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ; 8 8 5 $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 ; 8

PAGE 8

6 3 ) % ( % 4 ) ) $ ( % % ( $ ) $ % $ % % 2 $ ( % $ 2 4 % 2 $ 6 $ ( ) % 4 ( , ( % ! 4 ! $ % 4 % 2 $ r $ E ( $ $ % ) 4 ( % 2 $ $ + ( $ $ 4 % ( 4 2 ) 2 n n n n n r n r n % $ 6 $ $ % ) $ $ 3 $ ( 2 ( / r ) ) $ ! $ ( 0 2 5 5 A ( $ ( % $ % / $ ( % $ % 4 ! $ % 2 ) 2 + $ ( ( $ ) $ ( 2 0 % . $ % ) % 2 % 2 6 $ ( $ $ 6 $ ( $ ) + % % $ % ( $ ) 4 ( % . $ % $ G 3 $ $ 6 + 2 6 $ ) $ $ ( $ & $ ( $ $ ) $ % 2 + % 2 % ) 4 % ) + + $ ) % $ % H % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % 4 $ % $ ( 5 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % ) $ ) + $ % 6 $ ) % + % $ 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) % $ ( % 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ ) $ % . $ % ) 5 % ) 2 % 2 $ ) J $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ) $ $ 3 $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ) + + $ ) % $ % % 2 $ 3 % % 2 $ ) $ $ % 2 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 % ) ) 2 % 2 $ ) J $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ) $ $ ! 2 6 $ 3 $ % % $ ( ( $ + % 4 ( 3 A $ % ) ) % ! ) $ % % 2 $ % 0 ( $ ( $ ( 4 ( 3 A $ % ) $ ( 2 $ ( % % 2 $ % 0 % 2 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 2 $ ) % " $ % $ ( $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) = $ ( 4 ( 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) $ $ ) + $ $ ( ! % 2 $ ) $ 0 ( $ + ( $ ) ) 4 2 $ % 2 $ ( % 2 $ 6 $ $ $ % ( $ % ( ) $ $ 5 ( ) 3 A $ % ) 2 ( $ $ 6 $ ) 4 ( % 3 % 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) $ $ 0 ) + 4 % % $ ( % ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % )

PAGE 9

& 2 6 $ $ $ % ) $ $ $ ( $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ) $ ) % % ) 0 ( $ % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5

PAGE 10

8 r 8 r r r n % 2 # + 3 % $ ( 0 % ) $ $ % 2 % ) % 4 ) 2 6 $ ) $ % 2 + 4 ) % $ ( ) % ( $ + ( + % ) % $ + ( % 5 n % 2 $ $ 2 $ , # $ + $ 0 $ 6 $ 4 ) + 0 % 2 $ 2 $ ( $ % 4 ! 3 % 4 $ ( 5 n % 2 $ % 2 $ ( 0 $ ( ) $ % $ ) 2 " $ ) % ( $ 2 ) $ 4 # $ + $ % 2 % 2 ) % 2 $ ) $ ( ) % 3 $ ( 4 ) % $ ( $ ) 5 n 6 $ ( % 2 $ $ ( ) 0 % 2 $ % ( $ E % 4 $ ( 2 ) 3 $ $ $ & $ " 2 ! $ + $ 3 $ ( ) $ & $ ( $ % $ ( ) % % $ % + % ) $ ( 3 ) E $ ) % ) 3 % 2 $ $ ( ) % ( $ 4 ( % 5 2 $ 4 % % 2 % ) $ 4 ( % 3 $ 4 ( + % % $ ( ) % ( % $ 2 ) $ 6 $ ( 3 $ $ ) ( ( ) + 0 ( ) % ( $ ) ) + 5 % ( $ $ % % $ ) % 2 $ ) ) $ 4 . ( $ ( 2 ) % # $ 6 ) % ( $ ) $ ( % $ 5 2 $ ( ( $ % % ( 6 $ ( ) ( $ + ( + < ( $ 6 $ ( $ > $ ( $ ) 2 ) % 2 ( ) 2 + ) % ) 0 ) $ ( ) 0 $ & $ ( $ % $ ( ) % % 2 $ $ % $ ( 4 4 ( $ E $ % + 3 % % $ $ % 3 $ 4 ( $ % 2 $ $ 5 n % 2 $ $ 2 0 % 2 $ ( ) % ) $ + % 2 $ ( 4 ) $ & 3 ) $ ( % 2 $ ( % ( ( ) # 2 6 $ ) $ % $ ) ) $ $ % $ % ) " $ ( $ ! $ % $ % $ 6 $ % 4 ( % 2 $ ) % 2 6 $ ) % $ 4 ) % ( + $ 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ % 4 % 2 ) 2 $ $ 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 % 2 $ 3 ) $ $ 4 $ ( $ ( ) ' ( % 4 ( % 2 ) ( $ % 0 ) 2 ( % % $ ( ) 2 6 $ 4 % $ 3 $ $ 3 $ $ ) < E # ) > % 2 % " 3 $ % , + $ 4 3 + % 2 $ ( ) 4 ( ) 2 + ( 3 $ ) 5 n % 2 $ % 2 $ ( 2 0 $ & $ ( $ % ) % ) 2 ) + + $ ) % % 2 % ( $ 6 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) 3 $ ) % ( % $ ( $ % $ 4 3 ( % $ 3 $

PAGE 11

, . ) $ 4 3 $ + $ 0 $ $ & % ( $ $ 0 4 3 $ + ( % 4 ) ( 4 2 3 ) $ ( ) ) % ) % ) % 6 $ ( % 2 $ % ( % 2 K 8 L 5 n . + % $ ) " $ + ( ( $ % 2 ) $ 2 ( + $ % 2 % 2 % $ 6 $ ( $ 3 $ $ 6 $ ) 3 % . $ % ) # $ ( $ ( $ ) ) % 2 $ ) ) 3 % 4 ( $ 6 $ ( $ $ ( 0 % 2 $ 2 $ $ 4 $ ( ) % ( % ) E % $ ( $ 5 # $ + $ % 2 % 4 % ) % % $ $ % 2 $ ( $ % 4 $ ( ) = ) $ & $ ( $ $ ) 0 3 % ( % 2 $ ( % . $ % % 2 $ 2 ! $ + $ 4 $ % $ ( + 2 % 0 4 0 ) $ % ) 4 ) 2 $ ( $ ) 2 6 $ % 2 $ ( ( % ) % $ & $ ( $ $ 0 % . $ % % 2 $ ) ) 3 % % 2 % 2 % $ ( ) ( $ $ 3 $ ( ) 3 $ , ' ( & % 4 2 % % ! . ( ( $ 5 % 2 $ ( 4 4 ( $ ) ) 0 2 $ ( $ 6 $ ) % ( ) + $ ( $ $ 3 ( $ 0 % 3 $ $ ) ( % $ ( ) % % 2 $ % % ) 4 $ ( 5 r n n n 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) ) % $ % $ & $ ( $ % ) % 4 $ ( 3 $ + 8 @ @ C % 2 % 2 $ $ ( ) 2 + ) % $ ( 3 3 + 2 ) 5 $ 4 ( $ % 2 % % $ 0 ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) % $ % 2 $ ) $ 6 $ ) % 3 % + $ % ( $ ( % ) 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) 3 % % 2 $ ( ) 3 A $ % 6 $ $ & $ ( $ $ ) ( $ ( % 2 % 2 $ ) J $ 3 % $ ( % 2 $ ( + % 6 $ ( $ ) ) $ ) 5 3 3 + 2 ) = ) $ 4 ) $ ) $ ) ! 3 $ ) ! $ 2 % % ( 2 % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % $ ( $ 0 ) $ E $ % $ ) ( $ $ ( + $ ( % 2 ( + 2 ) % ( % ) $ % 4 $ % 2 5 2 $ ) $ $ ( ) % $ ) 0 3 6 ( % $ 4 % 2 $ ( $ % 2 0 ( $ 4 $ % $ ( % 2 ) 2 3 % 2 $ ( ) $ $ " ) % ( $ % 2 $ 3 ( 5 ( ) 3 $ $ < % ) > 4 $ ( 0 ) ) $ E $ $ % 2 $ E % 4 $ ( ) $ ) ( $ 3 2 < % ) > ( $ ( $ ! $ % $ 5 % $ ( ) % $ ) 0 % ) ) 6 $ ( $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % % 4 ( ( . $ % $ ( ) = ) ) ) $ ) ) $ % % 2 $ % 6 % 0 ( < ( + > 4 % 2 $ ( 0 ) $ % ! ( $ % $ ( ) ( . $ % ) 0 # + % 2 $ * ( $ # $ % 3 $ ( $ ! $ K L 5 2 ) 2 $ $ ) # )

PAGE 12

< ) ( $ + % 6 % 0 > ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % ( % 2 $ ( % 2 3 $ + ) ( $ % $ % ) 4 4 ( % 0 ( ) $ ( $ ( $ 4 % ) ) % $ % 2 % 2 $ ( ( ) 5 % 2 ) + $ $ ( % 2 $ ( $ ( 3 $ $ ) $ 3 4 $ & % $ ( $ % ) 0 % 2 ) $ % ! ( $ % $ ( ) ) ) % $ % 2 $ 2 % 2 $ ( ) ) % ( 6 $ $ 2 ) 4 ( % 2 $ ) ( $ + % 6 % 2 $ $ 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 % 2 $ ( ) ) % ! % 2 $ 3 ) % % 2 ) $ ( 2 $ 5 r n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r % 2 $ ( 0 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ( $ ) % ( % % 2 $ % $ % 4 % 2 $ ( + ) $ % $ $ " $ % $ ( $ 4 % 2 $ $ ) $ % $ $ 2 % 2 $ ) $ % $ % 5 4 % " 0 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % % 2 $ $ % $ ( $ % 2 % 2 $ ( ) 2 $ 2 ) $ $ % 3 $ 4 ( $ 5

PAGE 13

9 2 ) 0 1 $ # ) = ( + $ % ) % 2 % $ ( ) n ( % 2 $ ( % 2 n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n n 2 $ 1 $ # ) " % ) $ % 2 $ % $ ( < ) 2 $ 0 > 2 ) ) ) ) 4 % $ & % ) ) ) ) % $ % % 2 % 2 $ ) 2 $ % 6 $ 4 $ ( 5 2 $ ) 2 $ % % 2 $ ( 0 ) $ ) ( 3 $ 3 3 , ) 2 $ ( K 9 L 0 3 ) ! ) + + $ ) % ) % 2 % + 4 ( % ) $ $ " ) % ( $ 3 ) $ ( + $ ( % ( ( # $ + $ ) % ( % ( $ ) 5 2 $ $ $ ( % $ 4 ( A ( $ % ) 4 ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( / r 0 0 0 5 r ( $ 4 $ ( ) % % 2 $ ( $ ) ) 3 2 2 $ ( % 4 ( % ) $ $ 0 $ ( % 4 ( % ) % 5 . ( + % % 2 $ % 2 $ ( 0 2 $ % 2 $ ( ( % ( % ( $ $ 4 4 ( % ) $ $ " $ $ ) % 2 % 4 ( % = ) ( $ $ 6 $ % ( $ 6 ) $ & ) % + ) 2 $ % 2 % 2 ) 3 $ $ % 6 % $ 5 2 $ ( $ 6 ) # $ + $ ) ) $ ) ) $ 3 % 2 $ 6 % # $ % 2 $ 4 ( 4 # $ + $ 0 ( 4 # $ + $ 5 # $ + $ ( $ 4 $ ( ) % % 2 $ 2 $ $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ 6 # ) 3 % ) 3 A $ % M % 2 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 $ ! E ( $ $ 4 ( % 3 % % 2 % ) $ ) 3 A $ % 5 2 ) 2 ) 3 $ $ $ ) % ( % $

PAGE 14

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

PAGE 15

; ( $ % $ ) ) % ) 4 + 4 ( % % 2 % 2 ) 3 $ $ ) $ $ % $ 3 ) $ % ) $ ( $ 6 $ ( $ $ 6 $ % ( ( # $ + $ 0 3 $ % 2 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % 2 ) $ 3 % % 2 $ 4 ( % 5 2 $ 3 % % $ 4 ( ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( ) % 2 % $ ( ) % 6 $ ( 3 % ( $ ( 4 $ 6 $ % ) 0 3 % ( % 2 $ ( , + 4 ) % ( $ ) $ % $ & $ ( $ $ 5 2 $ % 2 $ ( ( 6 $ ) $ & , % 4 ( 6 ( $ % 4 $ ) % ( 3 $ $ ( ) % ( % ) 5 % ( 2 $ ( $ % 5 K C L $ ) % ( % $ A ) % ) 2 2 $ $ 2 $ $ & + 2 ) $ ( ) = ( $ 6 ) 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) 3 % $ % ) 4 4 $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ ( 5 2 $ ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 $ ) $ ( ) % 2 ( ( % 6 $ ) 4 ( % 2 $ ) $ $ % ) 0 % 2 $ % $ ( % $ ) % $ ( $ ! 4 ( % 2 $ ( ( % 6 $ ) 5 2 $ ) $ ( ) % $ $ % ( $ $ 3 $ ( 4 ( % % 2 % 4 ( $ % 2 $ ( ( $ 6 ) 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) 0 ( % 2 $ ( % 2 4 ( % % 2 % ) 4 ( $ % 2 $ ( 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) 5 2 ) $ 4 4 $ % . ( ( $ $ 6 $ % 2 + 2 % 2 $ ( ( % 6 $ ) % $ ( $ ) 4 ( % ( % 2 4 ( % ( 4 ( % 5 2 $ % 2 $ ( $ & ) 2 ) % ( % 3 ) + + $ ) % + % 2 % % 2 $ ) $ ( ) 0 2 $ ( $ + % 2 $ ( ( % 6 $ ) 0 4 % $ ( $ % 2 $ $ 4 ( % % 2 ( + 2 % 2 $ ( ( $ . $ 6 $ % ) ) + 6 $ ( $ $ 2 ) ) % % 2 $ 4 ( % ( 4 ( % 0 ( $ ) % + 3 $ % % $ ( $ + ) $ E $ % 3 $ % % $ ( ( $ ! 4 ( ) 2 4 ( % 5 2 $ ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( . % ) 4 ( ) $ $ & $ ) 4 $ ( ) % ( % 0 , % $ ( % 6 $ 3 4 ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ & $ 3 3 , ) 2 $ ( ) + + $ ) % ) % 2 % ) $ $ % ( % $ $ % ) 4 ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( ( $ % ( ( $ % 5 A ( $ % 4 ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( ) % 2 % % 2 $ % 4 4 ( % % # $ 3 ) 3 A $ % ) ( ) % ! ( $ $ % 2 ( + 2 % 2 $ ( $ ) ) $ ) 4 ) $ $ % 3 ) % ( % 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 3 , ) 2 $ ( . $ % 2 % ( $ % 0 $ ( 4 ( $ & $ 6 $ % ) ) 4 % E % $ ( 2 " $ % $ 0 2 2 ) 2 $ % % 2 $ ( $ ) % ! 4 ( 5 2 $ % 2 $ ( ) ) $ 4 $ & + $ ( 4 % ) % 2 $ 3 ( % ( 0 3 % 2 ) ( $ 4 4 % % $ . % + 4 ( $ ( ) % . ( ) $ 6 $ ( 4 $ 5 # $

PAGE 16

: 1 $ # ) = % $ & % ) % % 2 $ ( 0 ) 2 $ % % 2 $ ( $ ) 4 $ ( # $ % 2 $ 6 % 2 $ ( ( $ % $ ( % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ $ ) ( $ $ $ " ( $ ! $ % $ 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 3 , ) 2 $ ( % 2 % ) % ) 2 $ % % 2 $ ( $ ) ( $ ) % ( % $ % 2 % 2 $ ) $ 4 4 $ & + $ ( % # ) 4 $ ( ) % ( % ) ) 4 % $ E % $ $ & 2 $ ( 0 ) % . ) ) 0 3 $ E % $ . ( % $ $ 6 $ 4 ( 6 $ ( $ & $ 6 $ % ) 5 6 $ % 2 ) 0 ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( $ ( % $ ) 3 $ % % $ ( ) $ & , % 4 ( ) $ 4 % $ ) 4 $ ( ( ( ) % 2 , ) ( $ + 3 % 2 $ ( 4 $ ( 5 n n ( 1 2 ) = ) % 2 $ ( ) % % $ % ) % $ & 6 ( ) # ) 4 $ ( $ ( ( ( ) 0 2 $ % % 2 $ ) $ % $ A ) % $ % % 2 $ $ & % ( 2 $ ) ) 4 $ ( K ; L 5 0 2 2 ) % ) 4 ( % $ F % ( ( $ ( 0 2 ) % 2 % 2 $ 6 $ $ ) $ $ ( 2 $ ( ) 2 $ $ $ ) 2 ) % 4 6 ( + # ) 4 4 ( % 5 " % % % 2 $ ) $ % . % $ % 4 % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 0 % 2 $ 6 $ $ ) $ ( $ % $ % ) 0 ) 2 ) ) + 2 % ) 0 ) $ ! ) 0 ) ) 5 2 $ 6 ! ) $ $ ) < % $ & % > 4 ( % 0 $ 4 $ 3 1 2 ) ) ) $ ) $ 4 2 $ % $ % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 2 ' $ $ 5 % $ & % 4 ( % " $ # % 2 % * $ % $ ( $ $ $ % 2 $ $ ( " % % 2 % 4 ! $ % 0 ) $ ! ) ( $ $ 3 $ ( + 2 % % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 2 ' $ $ " 2 $ ( + % 2 $ G ( + 2 % H % . ( ( $ 5 ! 0 % 2 $ 6 $ $ ) < + % 6 $ $ ( % ) 0 > ( ) $ ) $ 4 % 2 $ $ 3 ( % 6 $ ( $ ) % ( % 6 $ ( $ ) ) $ ) % 2 % % # $ ( + % 2 $ 4 ( % 4 % 2 $ $ ( 5 . ( + % 1 2 ) 0 % ) % 2 $ E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ ) $ $ ( % ( $ ) % 2 % ! 6 % $ % $ ( $ 2 $ ( $ 0 2 $ 0 2 % 2 $ $ ( $ ) $ 4 3 % 4 4 ( % 5 2 ) < ) ( $ % ( + > ) % $ % ! ( % % 0 ) % ! $ ( ) % $ 6 % $ % 2 $ E % 4 4 ( % 5 ( $ & $ 0 $ ( + $ $ 4

PAGE 17

@ 4 ( % 4 ( % 2 $ % E ( $ ( ) ' ) $ % 2 $ $ ( # $ ) 2 6 $ ) + 4 % % 2 ) $ ( ) % 2 $ 4 ( % ) ) $ ( $ 5 n $ $ & $ 4 4 ( $ 4 ) ( $ % ( + ) % 2 $ < 4 ) $ 4 $ > 2 $ $ 5 1 3 0 $ ! $ 0 ( 0 1 ) $ 2 # K : L 2 ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ ) % 4 $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ % 4 ) 5 % $ ( 0 % 2 $ 2 % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ $ ) % " $ $ 2 $ % 2 $ ( $ 2 $ ) 4 ) ( % 5 2 $ $ ) % % $ 4 ) F 4 ) $ ) 0 + ) $ 6 $ ( 4 % 2 $ F 4 ) $ ) % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ 3 $ 4 ( $ 5 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ ( $ # $ % A + $ % 2 $ ( $ 6 ) 6 $ $ F 4 ) $ ) ) 4 ) % 2 % 2 $ $ F 4 ) $ ) 5 1 3 $ % 5 2 % 2 $ ) J $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 ( $ 6 ) 6 $ $ $ ( $ + J $ % ) 4 ( % 2 % ( $ $ 3 $ ( + 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ 2 $ ( % 5 2 $ % 2 $ $ $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ = ) 4 ( % ) $ % % 3 $ + 4 ) ) ( $ ) . ( + 5 ( $ % ( + 4 4 ( 3 $ ( 4 ( $ ) ) 5 . ( + % 1 2 ) 0 ) 2 % ( 0 " ) K @ L 0 ) ( $ $ % $ ( % ) $ $ " $ % $ % + E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 $ $ ( 4 $ 6 $ % ) M % 2 + % 2 % ( $ 6 $ % ) % 2 $ 6 4 ( ( $ % + 4 ! 4 ( $ < $ 6 $ % 0 > ) 2 ) ) % ( $ ) ) ( 6 $ % % $ % 0 ! ( $ $ % 2 $ % 4 % $ & % 4 ( % $ $ " ) 2 % 2 $ $ 6 $ % = ) E $ $ ) ) ) 3 ) $ E $ % ) ( 3 % 5 " % 0 4 % $ 6 $ % ) ( $ ) $ % ! ) ( % $ 2 % 2 $ ( % 2 $ ( $ ) % $ % 4 ( ) ( $ 4 ) 5 ( $ & $ 0 $ ( ) ( $ $ 3 $ ( 2 $ ( + $ ( % A # $ % $ ( % 2 $ 4 % % ) % % % 2 $ ( ( % 2 $ $ $ # $ ( $ ( % % 2 $ ) $ 2 ) $ 5 $ ( $ % 2 $ ( % $ ) 2 $ % % 4 4 $ ( $ % 2 ) $ ) % 2 $ 3 $ $ ( $ ) ) ( 4 ( $ 2 % 2 $ ( % 2 ) ( $ ) % + ) 2 3 $ 5 % ( ) % 0 1 3 0 $ ! $ 0 ( 0 1 ) $ 2 # K : L ( + $ % 2 % ( $ ! $ % + $ 6 $ % ( $ $ 4 4 ( % " % % % ! + 6 $ % 2 $ 6 ) $ ) $ 4 2 $ ( $

PAGE 18

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n $ ( % ( 4 ( 4 ) ( $ % ( + ) 2 % 1 2 ) r $ K ; L % $ ( $ ( $ % % ( + 5 r $ % % ( + ( $ 4 $ ( ) % % 2 $ 3 % % $ % $ ( $ 2 $ % 2 $ ( ( % ( $ ( ) ( + ! + $ $ ( % $ $ & % $ ( ! G ) $ ( $ % $ 6 $ % H ( % $ ( ! G ) ( % 4 + % ( ( $ ) H 5 1 2 ) r $ $ % $ ( $ % 2 % $ ( $ 6 $ " + $ $ 6 $ % ) ( $ E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ % 4 ( $ 2 % 2 $ ( 0 % ) % 2 ) E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ % 2 % ! ) 6 ) % $ % $ ( $ 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ $ ( $ 4 ( 5 $ ( $ 6 $ $ ( $ ) 0 % 2 $ ( % $ 0 % $ ( $ $ ( $ % $ % % 2 " + $ $ 6 $ % ) 5 $ ( $ 6 $ $ 6 $ % ) ) % $ ( 2 $ ( % $ & % 4 ( % 0 ) 2 ) 2 $ % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 2 ' $ $ 0 2 % 2 ' $ $ 3 $ 4 ( $ 0 2 % 2 ' $ $ 4 % $ ( ( ) 5 + $ $ 6 $ % ) 0 % 2 $ % 2 $ ( 2 0 % $ ( $ + % 6 $ $ ( % ) % 2 % ) $ ( 6 $ ) % # $ + 4 % 2 $ $ ( = ) 4 ( % 5 1 2 ) 0 ) 2 % ( 0 " ) K @ L ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % ( $ + % 4 + % 6 $ $ ( % ) 3 $ ) $ % $ % 4 % 2 $ 6 ) % 2 $ ) ( $ 4 % 2 $ $ ( 5 2 $ ( 0 $ ( 2 ( 0 N 4 % ) K B L ) $ " $ ) ( % ) 4 $ ( $ ) + $ $ ( % $ 3 ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( ( $ 6 ) $ & $ ( $ % ) # $ " $ $ $ % A + $ ) % ) ) 4 % 2 $ $ ( $ ) ) 3 $ + 4 ( % $ 6 $ % ) ( ) 3 $ + ( % ) 4 + % 5 2 $ % 2 $

PAGE 19

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n n n $ % $ % $ 4 4 $ % 4 4 4 % % ) ( % $ 3 $ % $ $ % $ % ) ( $ ) 4 4 ( % ) 2 % 4 % ) 4 4 K 8 8 L 3 3 $ < ) 4 ( % . $ % $ 5 > 2 ) 2 $ $ . ( ) 2 $ 6 0 4 % $ ( 3 ) $ ( 6 + ) $ $ 6 $ % 0 ) + 6 $ $ 4 ( % 3 % ( % ( ( % 4 % 2 $ $ 6 $ % % 2 % ) $ % 2 $ ( ) ) % $ % % 2 2 % % ! . ( ( $ ( ) $ % % 2 % ) % % ! 3 ) $ ( 6 $ 3 % 2 $ 6 5 2 $ 6 % 2 $ ( $ ! % 2 ) ) 4 ( % ) 4 % $ ( $ $ ( 4 % 2 $ 3 ) $ ( 6 $ $ 6 $ % 5 $ & $ 4 ) 4 ( % . $ % $ ) $ 3 4 % ) 4 4 , ) 4 2 % $ ) ) $ ( 3 3 $ ( 2 2 % 2 $ % 2 $ 4 % # 2 * $ ( 5 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % % 2 $ (

PAGE 20

8 8 % $ ) ) % 2 % 2 % % 2 $ % 2 $ 4 ) % $ ) ( $ ( 6 $ ( M 2 $ 2 $ ) % $ ( 6 $ $ 3 $ % 2 $ ) # $ 2 4 % 2 $ % 2 $ 4 % # 2 * $ ( ( ) ( $ ( 6 $ ( 0 2 $ % $ ! ) % 2 $ % ) ) ( $ ( 6 $ ( 5 n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n $ ) ) 3 % 3 $ % 2 % % 2 $ , . $ % $ % 2 $ $ ) % % $ $ % ) . ( % $ ) ( $ ( % $ % ) 2 ) $ ( $ 6 $ % 2 + 2 2 $ ) $ ! , ( $ 2 $ " % ) $ $ ) 2 % 2 + 5 2 ) ) ) % $ % $ & , % 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ 6 ) $ & $ 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ " % ) $ $ % 2 $ % 2 $ 4 % # $ % 2 + 0 ) ( 3 $ 4 $ 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 5 2 $ ) 2 $ ) % 3 $ . ( % $ 0 ) ) ) ) ( $ ( $ ) $ % ) 2 ) $ ( % 3 $ $ ( % 6 $ 0 ( % 6 ) $ $ + ) % 5

PAGE 21

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r % 2 $ ( 0 % ) $ $ % 2 % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ 3 $ % + $ $ ( % $ 6 ) + $ 4 ( % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 2 % ) % 2 $ ( ( % $ % $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ ) $ ) 0 3 % % 2 ) ( $ ) ) " % $ % $ ) 3 A $ % ) = 3 % % # $ + $ % 2 % % 2 $ 2 ( $ 3 % % 5 % 2 $ ( $ 4 4 ( % % ( 6 $ % % $ % $ 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 0 O ( + J , $ % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 3 $ 4 ( $ % 2 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % % 2 % ) $ % 2 + ) % 2 $ ( $ 3 % % 2 $ % $ ) % % 2 $ A ) % % # $ ( $ % ( ( $ % 5 2 $ ) 6 $ ( $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( + $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ M ) 3 A $ % ) 2 ( $ $ 6 $ % $ ( $ A ) % )

PAGE 22

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

PAGE 23

8 9 $ ) 0 2 $ 6 $ ( 0 ) 2 % 2 % ) 4 ( % 3 $ . $ % $ % 2 $ 4 $ 4 ( $ 6 ) $ ( $ % ) 0 . $ % $ % 2 4 $ $ 5 n n n n n n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

PAGE 24

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

PAGE 25

8 ; ( $ 3 6 ) 5 E $ ) % % 2 % % $ $ 6 $ % 2 $ ) ! $ ) % 3 % 4 4 ( % % $ % ! $ 6 $ % 4 ! F 4 $ + $ $ ( 0 $ ( % 2 % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % 3 $ ( $ $ 6 % + ) % % ) 6 $ ( % 5 r n n n n n n 2 $ % ( 6 $ ( ) ) ( ( + 2 ) ) % ) ) ) 3 $ $ 4 4 $ % ) $ ( 2 ) % ) % ' $ % 4 ( 3 $ + ) $ ) % $ 2 E $ $ ( ( $ 6 $ ( 5 2 $ ( ) % ) ) $ 2 ) ) # $ ) + + $ ) % ) % % 2 $ ( % $ % ) % 2 % . $ 6 3 ! 3 $ % $ ( ( $ % $ 3 % 2 $ % $ % ) ) ( + % + % 2 $ ( % 2 + 2 % ) ( ( $ ! $ % ) 5 % ) % ( $ ! ) 3 $ % 2 % $ ( ) . $ % 2 ! 4 3 ( % $ ( $ ) ) ) 3 $ + + $ $ $ ( D n $ % $ ( $ ) % + " % 4 + ( $ % $ % % 2 $ E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ $ ( $ 6 $ " + $ $ 6 $ % ) ) ( $ ( % $ 3 1 2 ) 0 $ 0 $ + ) 0 r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n $ ) ) 3 $ $ & , % 4 ( % 2 $ ) $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % 2 % ) $ ( $ ) + $ 0 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ 4 % 2 $ ( $ ( $ % ( 2 $ ) ) 5 " % 0 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ 4 2 % 2 $ $ ( 4 % ) % % 2 $ ( + $ ( % $ & % 4 % 2 $ $ ( ) = ) 4 $ 4 $ ) , 0 $ 6 + % 2 $ $ ( ) % $ 4 ( 2 % 2 ' $ $ 3 $ 4 ( $ 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % E $ ) % 5 2 $ $ ( $ ) % 3 $ % 2 % ) $ ( $ 6 $ $ ( $ ) + $ 0 % 2 $

PAGE 26

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n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

PAGE 27

8 @ % % $ $ % 0 % 2 % % ) ) ) 3 $ % ( $ % $ $ ( $ ) % 2 + $ $ $ % % $ % 2 $ $ ( + $ 3 $ ( ) % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) # $ $ ! % ( ) % $ 0 ) % % % # $ % 2 $ % 2 $ ( $ & $ ( $ $ 5 n 4 ( ) $ 0 $ % 2 ) $ ( % ) ( $ 6 $ % $ 2 $ ( 4 ( % % $ % + % ( $ % $ % 2 $ # 4 % ( % $ ( $ ) $ % ) % 2 % ( ) $ 4 ( 3 $ + 2 ) ! ( ) $ & ! 3 ) $ 5 n n n n # n $ n n % n ) ) ) + $ ( ) % ( % 0 % 2 $ ( 2 $ $ ( % 2 4 $ % ) % 2 $ < ( $ % $ ( + $ % % + > $ 4 4 $ % 5 % ' ( + K 8 L ) 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ + 6 $ ) % 4 ( ) % ( $ $ 3 $ ( 5 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % + ( ) % 2 $ % % 2 % % 2 $ ) % % 2 $ A ) % ( $ $ 3 $ ( $ ) $ ( $ ( % $ 0 % 2 % % 2 $ ) 2 4 ( + $ % % 5 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ + 6 $ ) $ ) % 4 ( ) % ( $ $ 3 $ ( 5 2 $ % ( + ( ) + 6 $ % 2 $ ) $ ) % % 2 % % 2 $ ) % ( % ) % 4 ( + $ % % 2 $ 4 ( ) % 5 % 2 + ( ) ( $ % 2 $ ) % ( % $ % ( $ ! ! % 2 $ ( ) % 2 % % 2 $ 5 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % + ( ) ) $ 4 ! $ % ( $ ! ( ) % 2 $ $ ( $ ( $ 6 ) % % 4 ( + $ % 0 $ ) % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) ) 2 ) $ % % ( $ ! ( ) 4 ( % 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) % ) $ 2 ( % $ ( ) % 4 % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % 5 2 $ ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + $ 4 4 $ % ) 4 2 $ % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % + ( ( $ ! ) 4 $ $ ( ( ) 4 ( % 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) % % 2 % 2 $ % ( + ( 5 $ 6 $ ( % 2 $ ( $ ) 2 6 $ 3 $ $ % 4 ( % 2 % $ & ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + 0 + 4 4 $ ( $ % $ + 0 4 4 $ ( $ % ) % ( + $ 0 ) $ $ % 6 $ ( $ 2 $ ( ) K L 5 2 $ % ) % $ 0 ( ) ) 0 2 $ % ) % $ K L ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + $ 4 4 $ % ) $ % % % 4 ) ) ( $ ) ) % 2 % $ % $ ( $ ) 2 % ! % $ ( $ % $ ( ) ) $ ) ) 5 ) % % J + $ 6 $ % F ( $ % $ 3 ( % $ % ) 0 ! ) $ ( + $ ( 0 $ # + $ ( 0 ! $ ( K L % $ % 2 % ( $ + % % ) # % $ 4 % $ ( % 2 $ % ( ) $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 0 % 2 $

PAGE 28

8 B ( $ ) $ % % 4 % F 3 $ F ( $ $ 3 $ ( $ ( ) $ 6 # $ % $ % ) 3 % 2 % 2 $ 4 ( % ( $ % ! 3 $ ) 0 2 $ ( $ ) $ % % 4 % F 3 $ F 4 ( + % % $ ( ) $ 6 # $ % $ % ) % 2 $ 4 ( % ! 3 $ 5 % ( ) % 0 4 4 $ ( $ % $ & $ ( $ % $ ) + $ % ( % 4 4 $ ( $ % $ + G % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ ) % ( % $ % ( $ ) ) ( ) $ % 2 $ ( ) 2 ! ( $ $ H ) 2 $ 3 % 2 4 ( % ( $ % r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r n & n n n n n ( n ) r * n $ ( $ ) % $ ( $ ) ( $ ( 3 3 $ 4 $ 4 ) % $ + $ ) $ 6 $ % ) 5 2 ( ) 4 $ ( % 2 2 ( # 4 $ F ) 2 ( $ + $ ) 0 2 2 ) % ! % 4 $ ) 2 4 % 2 $ % 5 ) % 2 % A 3 $ 0 % 2 6 $ ( % % $ 2 ( + 4 % M ) 2 ( ) % 2 % # $ $ ) ( 4 + + ) % % 2 $ ( $ ( + ( 4 + ( F 4 $ $ ) + % 2 $ ) 4 + 5

PAGE 29

4 = + + % ( % $ 3 % % 0 2 6 $ % + 6 $ % 2 $ ( $ ( + + 4 + ( F ) M % " ) % ( % 2 % 2 ' $ $ 7 ) $ ( ) % ( , ) $ & % ) ) ) 3 $ 2 % 2 ' $ $ 0 2 % ) M $ & % % 2 $ 2 = ) $ ( 2 ) 2 $ % % M % 2 3 $ $ 4 % 4 $ ( ) $ % 6 $ ( 6 ) 2 + % 5 K 9 L $ ( 2 ) % 2 $ ) % J J + $ ! + ) + $ ) $ 4 $ ( ) % ( % ) % 2 $ ) $ 4 A # ( ) # 5 8 B B C 0 # ( ) # 3 ) 2 $ 3 # ! $ 0 2 2 2 $ % $ ) , . % 4 2 ) $ & $ ( $ $ ) ) + 2 2 + ( $ r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r $ $ 3 ( $ 8 B B @ 0 # ( ) # % % 2 $ $ $ 3 % % 2 $ 4 ( ) % % $ 2 $ ) ( 3 ) # % ( # / ) % 2 % ) $ $ ) 3 ( + 2 % 3 # % % 2 $ 3 ( ( # 0 ) ) % % + % 2 $ 0 % 2 $ % 2 + 2 % ) % 2 $ ) % 4 % 2 $ 2 ( $ 5 % 2 $ ) 6 $ ( 2 ' 2 $ ) % 2 % % 2 $ ( 4 ( 3 ( ( # $ $ " % + ( ) 4 ( + ( $ % 2 + 2 ) 5 # $ % % 2 $ % 2 % = ) 2 # $ % % * $ ( 5 ) 6 $ ( 2 ) % ) 2 $ 0 % 2 + 2 % / 2 2 $ + ( = ) 2 ( % ( $ 2 % $ D 2 $ % 2 $ ( + ( ) ( 3 5 K C L

PAGE 30

8 ( + % 2 ) ) $ . $ ( % 0 # ( ) # ( 3 ) # $ " $ % % 2 $ 0 2 2 ) 4 $ 3 % 2 $ 4 ( % $ $ 6 ) ) $ 5 % ) 6 $ ( ( % 4 4 $ % + ) $ $ 5 0 ) % % ( ) % 0 $ ( ! 4 % ) 4 ) $ 5 # ( ) # = ) 4 $ % # $ & $ % $ % ( 8 B B @ 0 2 $ A ( ) % $ $ J 4 ( $ 3 ) 2 $ ) % ( 2 ! $ + + 2 ) $ % % ) ) % ) ( 6 6 ( K C L 5 $ % $ % 2 % # ( ) # ) % ! ( ( ) A $ 0 3 ( % J $ ( 8 B 9 8 0 $ 6 $ % ! % $ 3 2 $ ) ) $ 8 B 9 C 5 $ ) % 1 $ 4 ( r + 0 4 % 2 $ 6 $ ( $ 4 % $ % ( % J $ ( " ( + % 2 $ $ ( ( 5 ( ( 3 # ) D % ) % $ ( ) 6 $ ( $ % 2 % ) 2 $ ) % ! 3 % 2 $ $ 4 ( $ r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

PAGE 31

% r + r + n n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n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r $ + , ) ) 2 % 3 1 2 # $

PAGE 32

8 B @ 8 0 ! $ $ ( K : L % $ ( 6 $ $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ % 2 0 % 2 $ ) $ 6 $ % 2 ) 0 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 5 $ 4 % 2 % $ ( ) ( $ ! $ % ) $ ( $ ( 2 $ % $ " E % $ ) ) % $ % 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % % $ $ ( ) 5 $ ) 4 % 2 % $ $ 2 ( $ ) $ % 2 ) % ( + $ ( % $ % ) 2 ( $ $ 3 ( % $ ( $ ) ) % $ % $ ( $ ) 5 ! $ $ ( = ) ( $ ) % ) ) $ $ % 3 $ ( % ( # = ) % 2 $ ( 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 2 ) % $ ( ( $ % % ) ( $ $ # $ $ ) $ 2 % 3 % 2 $ 4 % % 2 % 2 $ 4 ( ) % % $ ( 6 $ $ 2 ) ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 5 2 $ ( ( $ ! $ % ) 2 6 $ 3 $ $ 4 $ $ 3 % # + % % 2 $ ( ) 3 % % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 6 $ ( % 2 % % $ 4 ( $ 5 2 $ ) $ ( % 2 $ 4 ( ) % % $ ( 6 $ % % 2 $ $ 6 $ % % ) $ 4 0 % 2 $ ( $ . ( % $ % 2 $ % $ ( ! 3 $ 0 ! + 4 ( 3 $ % % $ ( $ 4 2 ) % 3 $ ) 2 $ ( $ ) ( $ 6 $ ( % $ 5 $ ) ) $ ( ( ) 2 K @ L $ ( $ 3 $ % % $ ( 6 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ , 4 % $ ( % 2 $ ) $ ) 2 % % $ 2 ! $ + $ ( $ & $ 6 $ % % $ $ 6 ) ) % 4 % $ 4 4 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ ) 1 , ( 0 8 B @ ; 5 2 $ % 2 $ % $ 4 ( 8 I $ ( ) 3 $ 4 ( $ % $ ( 6 $ + % 2 $ ( ) 3 A $ % ) + 5 2 % % 2 $ 4 ) % 2 % 3 % % 2 ( 4 % 2 $ 9 9 ) % $ % ) 2 ( $ ! $ % ) % 2 % $ ( $ 4 % 6 $ ( ) ) % $ % % 2 % 2 $ ( % ( $ ! $ % ) 0 2 $ % $ 2 ( $ ! $ % $ % ( $ ) ) % $ % 5 " % 0 % 2 $ ) % $ % ) $ ( $ 4 ( $ E $ % 6 $ ( ) ( ( ) $ 2 $ 4 ( % $ % 2 % 2 $ ( % ( $ ! $ % ) M % 2 $ ( $ ( $ ) ) $ $ $ ) 6 6 5 $ ) ) $ ( 0 2 4 ( ) % ( % $ ( % E $ 4 % 2 $ < 4 ) 2 3 3 > % 2 $ ( 8 B @ 0 ) $ % 2 ) ) % % ) + + $ ) % % 2 % % 2 $ 2 $ $ ) ( $ % 2 % 2 ( $ 5 ) $ 2 % $ ) ) 2 ( ) 2 ( $ ) ) $ % ( # ) 3 2 ( ) % ) K B L 0 $ ) 2 ) 2 + ) % 5 $ % $ ( 6 $ $ 9 ) 3 A $ % ) ; $ $ # ) + $ $ ( 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ ) 2 ( $ ) % $ ( 0 n 4 $ 0 ) ) ) ) ) % $ 5 2 ( ) % ) 4 % 2 % % 2 $ % ( $ ! $ % ) % $ 2 + 2 $ 6 $ 4 $ % . $ ( + % 2 $ 6 ) = $ ( )

PAGE 33

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

PAGE 34

C % 2 % % 2 $ ) % $ % 2 $ ( ) $ $ % # 3 % ) $ $ + % 2 $ $ & ) % $ $ 6 ) % 2 % ) 2 $ % $ % 2 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 2 $ ( 0 4 ( $ 4 ) ( $ % ( + 5 2 $ ) $ % ( ) % ) % $ ) 4 $ ( ( $ $ ( % 4 ) % + 0 3 % % 2 $ 3 ) $ $ 4 ( $ ) $ 4 4 ( % 3 % 2 % 6 ) % ! $ $ 2 0 ! $ ) ) $ % $ 3 % 2 $ % % ! 4 $ $ ) $ ( 5 2 % 0 % 2 $ 0 ( $ % ( ! $ $ & $ ( $ % ) % $ ! ) D n n n + n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

PAGE 35

; $ ( $ + 6 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 4 ( 6 $ ( ) ) 4 + 6 $ ) $ ) # $ % # 2 2 $ % 2 $ 2 ( $ 6 ) ) $ $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) % ) % $ % 2 % 0 ( $ % % 2 $ % ( + ( 0 % 2 $ $ % + ( 2 3 $ % % $ ( $ ( 4 ( $ % ( $ % ) 0 3 % ( $ $ ( 4 ( $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) 5 % ( ) % 0 % 2 $ + ( ) 2 % 2 $ ) ) $ $ ) % ( % $ ( $ $ ( 4 ( 3 % 2 $ % ( $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) 5 2 $ ) $ ( $ ) % ) ) + + $ ) % % 2 % 0 ) $ 4 ( % 2 $ 6 $ % 4 % 2 $ % $ 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) ) $ % 2 + 3 % % 2 $ $ % % ( $ 4 % 2 $ < . $ % > ) $ % 2 % ( 6 $ $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ $ % ( $ % ) 5 ( $ ( % $ % $ ( $ % 2 $ % ( $ 4 % 2 ) $ 4 4 $ % 0 4 % ) 2 ( ) % ) $ & ) $ % 2 $ ( ) $ % 4 + ( ) % % 2 $ ) $ ) ) # $ % 2 $ % ( % $ 2 % % 2 $ 4 ( ) % % 2 + 2 % 3 % 2 $ 6 $ + $ 2 ) $ 5 % % 6 $ , ) ) 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) ) $ ) % $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ % + ( % $ $ % 3 $ ( $ ) $ 4 3 % % 2 $ $ % ( 4 + ( $ G 3 ( $ 4 $ ( ( + % 2 $ ( + $ $ ( ( $ 4 ( $ E $ % H 0 $ 4 ( $ E $ % ( $ 4 $ ( $ $ % % 2 $ $ % ( % 5 2 $ $ ( $ ) ( $ # $ % ( $ ( % ) $ 4 4 $ % 5 % ( ) % 0 % 2 $ $ % ( + ( ) ( $ # $ % % $ ) ( % ) 4 % 2 $ ) ( ( + $ 6 ( $ % 5 2 $ ) + ( ) # $ % 2 $ $ % + ( % 2 % % $ 4 $ $ ( * $ % ) 3 % % 2 $ ) ( ( + $ 6 ( $ % 0 3 % # $ % 2 $ $ % + ( % 2 % % 2 $ ( ( % ) % $ 4 $ $ ( 4 4 $ % 6 $ * $ % ) 5 ( + % 2 $ * $ % ) $ 3 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % % 2 $ ( $ 6 ) $ & $ ( $ % 0 % ) $ $ % 2 % % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( + % $ % 4 % 2 $ ( % ) $ ) % ( 3 % $ % 4 4 $ ( $ % 4 ) 4 % % $ % $ % ( 6 ) 5 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) 5 2 $ $ % + ( ' $ ( $ % 4 ) % 2 $ $ % ( 4 + ( $ 0 2 $ % 2 $ $ % ( + ( ' ( $ % ) 2 4 % $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ 4 + ( $ % 2 $ 4 + ( $ = ) ) ( ( + ) G 4 % ) 2 ( ) % ) % % 2 % % 2 $ 3 ) $ $ 4 % 2 ) % ) $ ( % 2 $ ( $ % 2 % % ( # % 2 $ $ ( ) ) = 6 $ $ % ) 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) % 3 $ ) ( $ 4 % 2 ) H 5 2 ) ) ) ) % $ % % 2 % 2 $ ( $ ) % ) ) 2 + 3 $ % % $ ( $ ( 4 ( $ % ( $ % ) 3 %

PAGE 36

: ( $ $ ( 4 ( $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) 2 $ % 2 $ ) $ % ) $ % % $ % 5 2 $ % 2 $ ) + ( ) ' $ ( $ % 4 ) % 2 $ $ % ( 4 + ( $ 0 % 2 $ ( # 4 , 4 4 $ % 6 $ ( $ ) ) $ 2 6 $ % ( 3 % $ % $ + ( $ $ + 4 $ ( 5 4 % ) 2 ( ) % ) % 2 $ ( J $ % 2 % $ ) ) 3 % 4 ( % 2 $ ) + ( = ) ( $ ) % ) 3 $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ ( $ 4 ) $ ) $ ) $ % 4 % 2 $ ) $ % % $ ) % $ 5 % 2 $ ( 0 ) ( ) % 4 % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % 4 $ % % $ % $ ( ( $ ) ) + ) % $ 3 ( # $ 0 $ $ ( 0 r $ ) 3 $ ( + K 8 L 5 % 2 ) ) % 0 % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ % 3 ) ) $ % ) 4 ) $ ) ( $ % 2 % ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( % # + 2 $ ( ) % 6 ) % 2 ) 4 % 2 $ ( % ( # G ) # $ ( ( % 6 $ . $ % 2 $ ) $ ( $ ) $ % % H 5 n $ ) $ % ) 2 $ % 2 $ % 2 $ ( % # + 2 $ ( ) % + ( + $ 0 2 $ ( $ 2 $ % 2 $ 2 ) 4 % 2 $ ( ( # , ( 5 % 2 $ ( ) $ % 0 % 2 $ $ % ) $ % 0 ) 2 $ % 2 $ % 2 $ ( % # + % 2 $ ) % 2 ) % 0 2 $ ( $ 2 $ % 2 $ 2 ) 4 % 2 $ ( $ ( 4 ( + ( 2 ) ( + ( $ ( $ 5 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ % % 4 8 ) $ ) $ ( + ( 0 % 2 % 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) $ % ) % ) $ % G % # + % 2 $ ) % 0 % 2 $ , % 2 $ $ 4 ( # H 3 $ + $ % 3 $ % $ $ + ( ) 5 ( # $ $ % 5 % $ ) % $ % 2 $ $ % % 4 % 2 $ ) $ ) 3 % ( + 2 $ ( % ( % $ 0 ) 2 $ % 2 % % 2 $ + ( ) 2 % 2 $ ) ( + $ ( ) $ ) $ ) % ( % $ ( $ 2 ) + ( ) % 2 % 2 $ + ( ) 2 % 2 $ + ( + $ ) $ ) 5 % $ ( $ ) % + $ + 2 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ) 4 % 2 % % 2 $ 2 $ ( % ( % $ 4 ) 3 A $ % ) 6 $ + % 2 $ ) ( + $ ( ) $ ) % ! r 5 2 $ % 2 ) + 2 % ) $ $ % 3 $ % $ ( % % 6 $ 0 ( # $ $ % 5 % $ % 2 % ( $ 6 ) ( $ ) $ ( 2 2 ) ) 2 % 2 % ( " $ $ $ ( % 2 ) 3 $ $ ) ) % $ % 2 ( % ( ) K 8 L 5 % $ ) % + $ ( 0 % 2 $ 6 $ % 2 $ % $ % 4 % 2 $ ) $ ) % 4 ( % $ + ( $ ) / + ) % G % 2 $ % 2 ( ) % 4 % 2 $ ) % ( H 0 3 ) F $ 6 $ 6 ) 4 ( % G 3 ( $ 4 $ ) ( % 4 % 2 $ ) $ E $ ) % H 0 $ % ( $ % ) G % F ( ( $ $ 6 % $ % ) ) % ! $ (

PAGE 37

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n $ % 3 $ $ & $ 4 ) 2 2 $ $ . ( ( + $ 6 $ ( 4 $ ) % 2 $ 2 $ $ 4 < + 4 ) 0 > $ & $ 3 4 % ) K L ) % 2 $ % $ $ 4 6 % ) 4 + + + ) ( 2 ) % 4 ) ( % $ % 2 $ $ 3 $ + % ( $ % 2 $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) % ) 2 + 2 $ % $ " $ ) ( % 4 % 2 $ $ % ) $ 4 0 % 2 6 + $ ) $ ) $ 4 % 2 $ $ ( ) 2 2 ' $ $ % 3 $ 2 + % 5 2 $ ( ( + 4 % % $ % 2 ) 3 $ $ $ ) % ( % $ ) % $ ) ) $ ! 5 ( % J 0 3 $ ( + 0 r 3 ) K L $ ) % ( % $ 3 ) + % 2 ) % ) $ % 2 % # $ ) ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 $ % ( # $ 4 $ ! % ( % 2 $ ( $ $ ) ! ( % 2 $ 4 $ 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 2 $ ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 < % 2 ( $ % > 4 $ G $ $ ) % 2 $ $ H 0 % 2 $ # $ ) ! 4 ) % 2 $ $ $ ) % 2 0 4 + % % # $ % 2 $ $ % ( $ 4 $ ) 3 $ 4 ( $ 5 2 $ ( $ 6 ) ) % $ ) 2 6 $ ) % ( + ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % , ( ( + 4 % % $ % $ % ( $ % ) . ( ) ( + $ % $ 6 $ % ) 5 % ( . ) 3 $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ 2 $ $ ( 4 ( $ % ( $ % ) ) $ % % 2 $ " % % % $ % ( $ ) ( $ ) $ 6 % $

PAGE 38

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r $ ) 3 $ ( + K 8 L 5 2 $ $ % $ + ( " % ) 2 % 2 $ $ % F $ 2 + $ 4 4 $ % ) ( ! ) $ $ 6 $ + % 2 $ $ % ) $ ) 5 n 4 ( ) $ 0 ) $ % 2 $ ( ( ! ) ) % $ ( $ ( ( % 6 $ + % 2 $ ) $ ) 0 % 2 $ # 4 $ 4 4 $ % 4 ( $ % % $ % 3 $ $ % ) ) 4 % 2 $ % % $ % ( ( + $ 4 4 $ % 5 n 2 $ ( ( + $ 4 4 $ % % 2 % $ % % $ % 2 6 $ 6 = ) % % $ % ( ) $ ) % 2 $ E $ ) % 4 2 % . ( ) 2 $ 6 ) ( $ ) # $ % ( $ ) % ( % $ % $ 6 $ % ) 5 ! % 2 $ 3 $ 3 $ % ) $ ( % 2 % % 2 $ " % ( $ ! 2 % % $ % % $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) D ! % 2 $ 3 $ ( $ ) ) $ % 3 $ % . $ % + ) 4 ( % 0 ) 2 ) ) D ! % 2 $ 3 $ ( $ # $ % # $ $ ( ( ( ) 4 ) ( $ ( ( $ % % ( + D 2 $ ( ( $ % ) % ) $ ) + $ % ) $ ( % 2 $ ) $ E $ ) % ) 5 2 $ ) % ) 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 6 $ % $ 6 + $ % % $ 4 , 2 6 + ) ) ) 5 n $ + ( ) ) 2 6 + $ % % $ % 2 $ % % $ % % 2 % 2 ) % 2 $ $ ) ) ) + $ % ( G F $ % H ) ) $ ) 4 ( ) $ % % 4 % $ ) $ 6 $ ( ( ) 4 2 ) $ 5 ) $ + ( ) ) 2 $ % 6 + $ % % $ % 2 % ) $ ( $ % ! ) ( % % 2 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 0

PAGE 39

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n % 2 $ ( ) 3 A $ % ) % # ) ( % $ ) % % 2 % " % $ ) 4 ( % 5 4 % $ ( % 2 ) % $ ) % 0 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ + 6 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % 4 ( 6 ( $ % 4 % $ ) 5 $ 4 % 2 $ ) $ % $ ) $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ ) $ $ 0 ) $ $ ( $ % 5 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) % $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ ) + + $ ) % $ % 3 $ ( $ ) $ % 3 % 2 $ % $ ( ) $ % $ ) % G % 2 % ) 0 % 2 $ % $ ) % % 2 % ) + 6 $ % % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % ) H 5 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % ) 2 ( $ ) $ ) % 6 $ % % $ ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( $ ) $ ( $ % 2 6 $ . $ % $ % 2 $ ) 4 ( % 5 ) $ ( $ 6 ) ( $ ) $ ( 2 0 % 2 $ 4 ! + 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ ( $ $ / % 2 $ % % 2 % ) 4 ( % 0 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ) $ $ ! 2 6 $ $ 2 $ $ ( 4 ( $ % ( $ % ) ( $ $ ( 4 ( $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ) ( $ % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 % 2 $ % % 2 ) 4 ( % 0 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ) $ $ ! 3 $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ % $ % $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) 0 $ ) ) # $

PAGE 40

8 % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ % $ % $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 n r n # n $ n n + + r n n $ 4 ( $ % + % % 2 $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % 0 % ) ( % 2 2 $ % ) $ ( $ % 2 + ) ) $ % 2 % ) $ ( % % 2 ) 4 $ 4 ) % 5 $ ) ( $ % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % 4 $ % $ ( 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( # $ ) # $ ) ) % ) / % 2 % 2 ) ( 2 $ ( $ % 2 ! 3 $ ) . $ ) ) 4 $ 6 # + $ % ( $ ) ) $ 0 % 2 % 2 + $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % ( + ( % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % + ( ) % 2 $ ( $ ) % 4 % 2 % $ % 5 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) ) % 3 $ 2 $ # $ 3 $ ( 4 ) / 3 ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % 0 $ ) ( + 2 $ ( % ( % $ 0 ( % 2 $ ( 2 ) + ) + ) 4 ( ) G + 0 ) ) + % 2 % $ % ( $ ) ) $ ! ( $ ) 2 2 + $ ) % 2 $ ) % 2 $ % $ ( 6 ) ) ) % $ H 5 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) 2 3 $ 3 $ % $ % $ ( $ % 2 % % % 2 $ 6 $ ( $ ) % 0 $ % ( $ % 2 ) 3 $ $ ( $ 5 2 $ ) $ ) ) % 0 % 2 % % ) % 2 $ $ % ( $ ) ) $ % 2 % ( $ ) % 2 $ 2 + $ ( $ ! ( ( $ + % 0 ) ( $ ( 3 $ % 5 ( $ ( % ( 6 # $ % 2 $ $ % ( $ ) ) $ % 3 $ + % 2 0 2 + $ ) ) % $ $ ) ) ( 3 $ $ % % 2 $ ) % % 2 % ! 3 $ ) $ 5 4 $ ) ( $ ) $ % + ) % ) % 2 % ) $ ) + $ % ( 6 # $ $ % ( $ ) ) $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % 0 % 2 % ) % ) ) % 3 $ 4 E % % 6 $ 4 4 $ ( $ % % ( $ % 2 , ) % ) % 2 % ) % % $ $ % ( 6 # $ ) 2 ( $ ) ) $ 5 ( $ & $ 0 ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) 2 + % ( 6 # $ $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) ( % 4 % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % $ % 2 ) 3 ) 2 + % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % % ( $ 4 $ # % % $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( + 2 % ) 2 % ) 2 2 % + ( 2 % % 2 $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) $ ! 5 ) ) + % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( $ ) % % % ( 6 # $ $ % ( $ ) ) $ % 2 $ % ( + ( 0 2 $ ( ) 2 $ ) % # $ ! % ) 2 % 2 $ ) $ 2 % 5 # + ) 2 2 + $ ) ) % 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % ( $ & $ ( $ % + ( ) 0 4

PAGE 41

) % 2 ) % ( $ % % 2 $ ) ) % $ 5 4 % $ ( ! 0 % 2 $ % ( $ 6 ( 3 $ ) % % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ % 2 % + ( 2 ) 0 3 % ( % 2 $ ( % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ % $ % ( $ ) ) $ G ( # % 2 $ ( $ 4 H % 2 % % 2 $ 2 % ) ( $ 5 2 $ 2 + $ ) ( $ $ $ ) $ $ $ ( 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) % 2 ) 4 $ % 2 % 2 $ E $ ) % 4 2 % ( $ ! ) $ % 2 $ 2 + $ 5 ) % % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ % $ % ) % % $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ & $ ( $ $ D n ( ) % % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ 2 ) ) % % 2 $ ) $ 6 $ ) D 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) ) % + % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % 4 $ % $ ( 0 2 $ ( ) 2 $ " 3 % $ ( $ 4 $ ( % 3 $ $ 6 $ % 2 % % ) % 2 $ $ % $ % % 2 % ( $ % 2 $ 2 + $ 5 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ ) % % 2 $ ) $ 6 $ ) 0 2 $ 6 $ ( 0 $ 6 $ ( 3 $ $ % $ ) % $ 5 ( # $ 0 $ $ ( 0 N r $ ) 3 $ ( + K 8 L ) $ ( $ % 2 % $ ) % 3 $ ) + % 2 $ ) $ ) % 4 ( % 2 $ % ( $ % + ( ) 0 % 2 $ % + ( ) % 2 ( + 2 ) $ $ & % $ ( $ ) 5 n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

PAGE 42

2 ) ( $ ) % ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 2 + ( $ % $ ( $ % ( $ % % ) 2 ) $ $ ) 2 ( 6 $ $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ 5 ( # $ $ % K 8 L . $ % 2 % % 2 + 2 % 2 $ 4 4 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ ) % % 3 $ ) % $ 0 < % 2 $ . % 4 $ 6 $ $ $ ) A ) % 4 ) $ # + % $ ( ) 4 $ ( $ 4 4 $ % ) 5 >

PAGE 43

9 r n + ( n 8 $ ( + ( % $ ) % $ % ) 4 ( % 2 $ 6 $ ( ) % 4 ( $ ( $ ( $ ( % $ 4 ( % 2 $ % ( % ( ) 2 + ) ) 4 4 $ ( $ ( ) $ ( $ % ( $ % ( 4 ( ( % % 5 2 $ ) % ) ' ( 6 $ 3 % 2 $ $ % 2 $ $ $ % $ ( r G r F 8 H 0 ! ) 3 A $ % ) $ & $ % $ ( % % $ ) $ % 4 ( ( ( % ( % % + 5 / n 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) $ ( $ ( $ ( $ ) + , ) F : 8 + % ( $ ( 0 2 2 ) $ % $ % , ( & % $ ( A $ % ( 4 ( 6 $ + 5 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) $ ( $ ( A $ % $ % ) % ( 2 % $ 6 $ ) ( $ $ 0 $ + 6 $ + ( $ , ' ( & % $ C 4 $ $ % % 2 2 $ + 2 % 5 2 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % % $ ) $ ( $ ( $ ( $ " $ , ) ) $ % % $ ( $ ( $ ( 5 % ! 4 ( $ ) 4 $ 2 ) $ $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ + ( $ ) 8 0 0 5 n 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ ( ) ) + $ % $ 4 4 ( + ( ) 0 # + 4 ( % % 4 C ) 3 A $ % ) $ 2 + ( 5 2 $ $ + ( 2 . 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 4 $ 2 + ( ( $ ) % $ 3 $ 8 5 2 ) 3 A $ % ) ( 2 ) $ ) / % 2 + % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ 0 % # + ( $ I ) $ % $ ) % 0 % 2 $ % # + ( $ + % % $ ) % 5 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % 2 % 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) % ) 5 2 $ 4 ( ) % % ) 2 2 6 + $ % % $ G $ % ( ( $ % H % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 6 $ $ 5 2 6 + $ % % $ )

PAGE 44

C 3 $ 8 / $ + ( 2 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 4 2 ( G % ( $ 3 A $ % H P 4 $ ) P 4 $ $ ) 6 $ ( + $ + $ G $ ( ) H % ; 8 B 8 @ 5 ; @ ) 4 ( % $ % ( ; 8 B 8 @ 5 B % ; 8 B 8 B 5 B ; ) 4 5 $ % ( : 8 @ 8 @ 5 ; @ + ( $ 8 / $ $ 3 $ ( n $

PAGE 45

; + ( $ / $ $ 3 $ (

PAGE 46

: + ( $ / $ $ 3 $ ( 2 ( $ $ ' ( & % $ % 2 $ ) $ $ + % 2 G 9 % $ ) + H 5 2 $ $ ( $ $ 2 ) % % ) $ ( % $ ) $ $ ) 5 2 $ 4 ( ) % ) $ ) $ $ ) $ 2 ) % $ ' ( & % $ 8 Q % $ ) 0 2 $ % 2 $ % 2 ( ) $ $ ) % $ % % $ 6 $ ( % $ 5 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ ) ) % $ 4 , ) ) ) + % 2 $ ( , ) 4 ( % 2 $ $ $ # $ 5 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ ) ) % $ 4 % 2 $ ) $ , , ( + + 3 % % 2 $ ( ) ) 3 $ $ & ) ( $ % 0 % 2 % 2 $ ) % ( # + % 2 $ * % 2 ( + 2 % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ 5 $ 6 $ ( % 2 $ ( ( $ ) $ % G % 2 + 0 $ ( , + $ 0 $ % 5 H % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) $ ( $ $ % 5 ( 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) + 2 % + $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % 0 $ % % 2 $ 4 % % 2 % % 2 $ $ % $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ ) $ ( $ 4 $ " 4 4 $ ( $ % ) 5

PAGE 47

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

PAGE 48

B < $ ( 2 $ ( > % $ ) $ ( $ ) ) 4 $ ) ) 2 3 ) $ % 2 $ 3 $ + ) $ % % 2 $ $ 4 % ( ( + 2 % $ + $ 4 % 2 $ ) ( $ $ 5 % 2 $ 2 % 0 % 2 $ $ ) + ) ) 4 ! ) / ( % % $ $ ) % ) 4 ( % ) 4 ( % $ % C C + $ % % $ / + 2 $ % C C n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

PAGE 49

9 4 $ ( 5 ! 3 $ ) % $ + % 6 $ % 2 ) % $ 2 $ 5 2 $ 6 $ ! ) , 3 $ ( 4 4 4 $ ( $ % % $ ) 5 $ 4 % 2 $ ) $ % $ ) $ ( $ % 2 $ % $ ) $ ( $ ( 0 % 2 $ ( % $ ) $ ( $ % 5 % % ) % $ % $ 2 % $ ( % $ R $ ) = 4 ( $ $ 3 $ ( ) $ $ + % % 2 $ % $ R = 4 % ( $ $ 3 $ ( ) $ $ + % 5 > 4 % $ ( % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ % $ % 2 $ % $ ) % % 2 $ ( ' $ ( ) $ ( $ ! $ % $ 0 % 2 $ $ ( $ + 6 $ % 2 $ ' ( % % % 3 $ $ 3 ( $ 4 $ ) % % 2 $ % ( $ ( ) $ 4 % 2 $ ) % 5 n r n n 0 n n n % 2 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % 0 % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) $ 6 $ ( 4 4 $ ( $ % % $ ) 4 % $ ) / 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ + $ $ % $ ) 0 % + % $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ % ! ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ 5 2 $ ) $ $ ( $ 6 $ % $ % ( 0 $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 5 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) + + $ ) % $ % $ ) 0 % + % $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ % ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ 0 3 % $ ( $ ) + + $ ) % $ % 3 $ ( $ ) $ % 5 2 $ ) $ $ ( $ 6 $ % $ % ( G ) + + $ ) % $ H 0 $ ( 2 $ ( G ) + + $ ) % $ H 0 $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ G ) + + $ ) % $ H % $ ) 5 ! 0 % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) $ ( % $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ $ % 2 $ ( ( $ ) $ % ( ) + + $ ) % $ 5 $ % 2 $ F ) 4 ( % + ( ) " % 2 6 $ % $ ) ) + + $ ) % $ % % 2 $ 0 % 2 $ $ % ( $ ( 2 $ ( ) + + $ ) % $ % $ ) $ ( $ % ( $ % $ ) ) $ ( ) ) $ ! 5 ( + $ $ % $ ) 0 % 2 $ 3 $ ( 4 2 % ) G ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 % 2 $ % $ H ) ( $ ( $ 5 ( ) + + $ ) % $ % $ ) 0 % 2 $ 3 $ ( 4 < 2 % ) > ) ( $ ( $ 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % ) 5 ( ) $ ( ) 0 % 2 $ 3 $ ( 4 4 ) $ ( ) ) ( $ ( $ 5 % % ) % , ) ) $ n $ 2 % ) 4 ( 3 % 2 ) 4 ( % ) 4 ( % + ( ) 5 ( G ) 4 ( % 6 ) 5 F ) 4 ( % H + $ % % $ G $ % 6 ) 5 $ % ( H $ ( $ 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 6 ( 3 $ ) 0 % $ % $ G $ % ( 6 ) 5 $ ( 2 $ ( H ) $ $ G $ 6 ) 5 % 6 ) 5 % 2 ( $ $ H $ ( $ % 2 F ) 3 A $ % ) 6 ( 3 $ ) /

PAGE 50

9 8 ( ) 4 ( % ) 4 ( % + $ % % $ $ % ( P 2 % ) G H I P 2 % ) G H P 2 % ) G H I P 2 % ) G H % P 2 % ) G H I P 2 % ) G H P 2 % ) G H I P 2 % ) G H $ ( ) ) ) + % 2 $ 4 $ ( ( $ % 2 $ ( $ $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( % $ 0 % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % % $ 5 n % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 " % ( $ $ 6 $ ) 4 ( % $ ( $ $ % 2 $ $ ( ) 5 2 ) $ 4 ( ; $ ( ) ) / 8 ( ) 3 $ % $ $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % & $ $ + ( $ G $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) $ $ 8 0 $ % ( % $ ) $ $ 8 0 $ % H 5 2 $ 4 ) $ $ ( ( ( ( % $ ) ) $ % % S 5 8 4 ( % 2 ) ) $ % 4 ( ) ) 5 % 2 $ ( n ) % $ % 2 2 % ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) ) % 2 $ $ $ $ % 6 ( 3 $ 5 2 $ ) $ % $ ) $ ( $ ) $ ( $ ) $ ( % $ 4 ( % 2 $ % 2 $ ( 2 % ) 0 ) % 2 $ $ ( $ ( $ ) $ % ! ) $ $ ) G ) ' ) $ % % 2 $ $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 2 2 $ ( $ $ 2 ( $ ) $ % $ ) $ $ H 5 " % n ) % $ ) 4 ( % % $ ) 5 n % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % ) $ ( $ $ % 2 ) n 5 + $ % % $ $ G $ % 6 5 $ % ( H ) $ ( 6 $ ) 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( 0 % G $ % ( 6 5 $ ( 2 $ ( 6 5 $ ( ) H $ $ G 8 6 5 6 5 H $ ( $ % 2 F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( ) 5 $ ( ) ) ) + % 2 $ 4 $ ( ( $ % 2 $ ( $ $ 3 $ % $ $ % $ % ( 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % & $ $ + ( $ 5 2 ) $ 4 ( B $ ( ) ) 5 2 $ 4 ) $ $ ( ( ( ( % $ ) ) $ % % S 5 8 4 ( % 2 ) ) $ % 4 ( ) ) 5 ! 0 n ) % $ % 2 $ 4 ) $ ( ( % $ 0 % 2

PAGE 51

9 + $ % % $ $ G $ % 6 5 $ % ( H ) 4 ( % % G ) 4 ( % 6 5 ) 4 ( % H ) 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( ) 5 n n 0 n " % % % 2 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % 0 % , ) ! $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ I ) $ % $ ) % ) 3 A $ % ) % # ( ( % % # + % 2 $ ( $ + % % $ ) % 5 & E $ ) % ) $ ( $ ) $ $ % $ 0 2 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ ) $ ( ) ) ! % ) 5 2 $ ) $ E $ ) % ) $ 2 ) $ ( $ ) $ 4 % ) $ 4 ) $ $ 0 ) # + 2 $ % 2 $ ( % 2 $ % % # $ ( % 5 E $ ) % ) 4 ( $ 2 ) $ $ $ ( $ ) $ $ % $ 5 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) = ( $ ) ) $ ) % $ 2 E $ ) % G . ( % $ ( . ( % $ H $ ( $ ( $ ( $ 5 n ) % $ % 2 + $ % % $ $ ) 4 ( % % ) 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( ) 0 $ ) % G 8 % 2 ( + 2 ; H ) % 2 $ % 2 F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( 5

PAGE 52

9 r r n n n 1 n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n 2 n 2 $ ) $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) + + $ ) % $ % 2 % % 2 $ % % 2 ) 4 ( % 0 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ) $ $ 3 $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ % $ % $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) 0 $ ) ) # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ % $ % $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 % $ ) % 4 ( % 2 ) 0 $ ( ) ) $ ( $ $ % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % G $ % ( 6 ) 5 $ ( 2 $ ( 6 ) 5 $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ H & $ $ G 8 6 ) 5 6 ) 5 H + ( $ 5 2 $ ) $ $

PAGE 53

9 9 ( ) ) ) 2 $ " 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % & $ $ $ 5 2 ) 0 % 2 $ ) $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) % ) ' ( % $ 5 r n r n r 3 n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r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

PAGE 54

9 C 3 $ / $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) + $ % % $ $ $ ( % % $ ( $ ) % % % $ ( % % : 5 @ ; G 8 5 9 H C 5 : ; G 5 8 H C 5 ; G 5 8 H 8 5 ; G @ 5 H : 5 B G B 5 H $ % ( : 5 9 9 G 8 5 8 8 H 5 G 5 B C H 5 ; G 8 5 : ; H 5 G B 5 C H : 5 B G @ 5 B H n 0 n n G + $ % % $ $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M $ % ( 0 $ ( 2 $ ( H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n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

PAGE 55

9 ; ) ) $ 4 4 $ % 4 ( $ $ K G 0 8 B H S C 5 : ; 0 T 5 C L 0 $ ) % ( % + % 2 % ( $ + % 4 ( % $ ) 4 ( % 2 $ ( ) $ $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) ) $ ( ( % ( $ + % 4 % $ ) ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ 6 ) ) $ $ ) 5 2 $ % $ ) % 4 ( $ ( 4 ( ) $ $ ) ) + 4 % K G 8 0 B ; H S 9 5 @ ; @ 0 T 5 C L 0 % + ) + 4 % $ ( % ( $ 2 % ) G % 2 ( $ + % ( 6 + 4 ( $ 2 ) 3 ) $ E $ % ) $ $ H 5 ! 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) ) + 4 % % & $ $ % $ ( % K G 0 8 B H S @ 5 B 9 9 0 T 5 8 L 5 2 ) % $ ( % ) ( $ ) $ % $ + ( $ 9 5 2 $ ) $ ( % $ n % $ % 2 $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) ) 2 $ ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) 5 n r r n r + ( $ 9 ? $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H % r n r 0 G + $ % % $ $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H n ) % $ % 2 $ 4 ) $ ( ( % $ G ! % $ 3 6 + % 2 $ 3 $ ( 4 4 ) $ ( ) 3 % 2 $ % % 3 $ ( 4 ) $ ( ) ( $ ) $ % H 5 2 $ n ( $ 6 $ $ ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) 5

PAGE 56

9 : 3 $ 9 / $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H ) $ ( r % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) % 8 5 @ U 5 G 5 B 8 H ) 4 ( % $ % ( 8 5 9 U 5 @ G 5 : C B H % 8 8 5 U 5 ; G 5 : C : H ) 4 5 $ % ( 8 5 U 5 G 5 : : H n 0 n n G + $ % % $ $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 6 5 + + $ ) % $ $ % ( 6 5 + + $ ) % $ $ ( ) H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n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

PAGE 57

9 @ + ( $ C 0 ( + % 2 $ 6 $ ( + $ ) 4 ! ) 4 ( % % ) ( ) ) ! 9 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) + ( ) $ ( $ ) % ( % $ ) % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % $ ( ) $ % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % $ ) % 2 + ( $ % $ ( 4 ( $ E $ % 2 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 5 n n ! + ( $ C ? $ 6 $ ) 4 ( $ ( ) $ $ % 4 ) 4 ( % % $ ) G % ( $ 3 A $ % H n 0 G + $ % % $ $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & ; G $ ) % M 8 F ; H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n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

PAGE 58

9 B 3 $ ; / $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % ( $ 3 A $ % H $ ) % 8 $ ) % $ ) % $ ) % 9 $ ) % C $ ) % ; % 5 C 5 9 5 @ @ 5 @ @ 5 @ @ 5 ; @ ) 4 ( % $ % ( 8 5 5 ; 9 5 : ; 5 @ 5 @ 5 C % 5 : 5 9 9 8 5 5 B 5 @ @ 5 ; @ ) 4 5 $ % ( 5 B ; 5 C 5 B 5 B ; 5 B 5 C n n + ( $ ; ? . ( ( % $ 4 ( ) $ $ % $ ( $ I ) $ E $ ) % ) 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G % ( $ 3 A $ % H n n r n + ( n 2 $ % , ) $ ) % 2 $ % 4 % ( ( $ 6 $ $ ) + 4 % 6 ( 3 % + ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ( ( % + 4 % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 2 $ % ) % ( $ % 2 % ) 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ % + $ % % $ ( % $ % 2 $ % $ ) ( $ $ % % 2 % 2 ) $ 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( + $ % % $ 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) ( $ 6 ( 3 % % 2 $ ( ( % + ) % 2 $ & $ % $ 5 $ 6 $ (

PAGE 59

C ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ ) " % 4 % $ % 5 2 $ ( $ ) ) $ . $ ( % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ ( 4 ( $ 3 $ ) $ ( % % 2 ) $ 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ ) 0 ) $ E $ % ! " % $ ( % 2 $ ( ) $ $ + % $ % 2 $ ( $ ) ) $ ) 4 % 2 ) $ 2 " 4 % 4 % 2 $ % $ $ % 5 ) $ E $ % 0 % ) $ $ 3 ) ) % ) % % 2 $ $ % ) 3 A $ % ) % % + ( ) / % 2 ) $ 2 ( % $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ < C > ( $ ) ) $ % % 0 % 2 ) $ 2 ( % $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ < ; > ( 2 + 2 $ ( % 2 ) 6 ( 3 $ 5 2 $ $ + ( ) $ ( $ 3 $ $ % 2 $ < % > + ( 0 % 2 $ < + 2 % > + ( 5 2 $ < % > + ( $ $ 8 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 B ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 5 2 ) $ 4 % % 2 $ < + 2 % > + ( % 2 8 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 8 ; ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 5 n 4 % $ ( $ ) % ) 2 $ % 2 $ ( % 2 $ < > 6 ) 5 < + 2 > + ( 6 ( 3 $ G 3 $ $ < % $ 6 $ > % 2 $ , ) $ ) H ( 6 $ ) + 4 % 4 % ( % 2 $ $ ( 4 ( $ 4 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 5 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ $ ( $ % $ % 2 ) ) $ % 4 , ) $ ) 5 r 3 n 0 $ ) 4 ( ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % ( % + ) 4 ( $ 2 % ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ : 5 3 $ : / $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) G % 3 A $ % ) H $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) ( $ ) ( $ ( % % $ ( $ ) % % % $ ( % % : 5 C : G 8 5 @ B H 5 9 @ G 8 5 B H 9 5 8 G 8 5 C C H 8 5 G B 5 8 H ; 5 @ G B 5 H + 2 % @ 5 8 G 5 B ; H : 5 9 8 G 8 5 8 @ H ; 5 ; B G 8 5 @ H 8 5 @ G : 5 @ H @ 5 B G B 5 C H 2 $ % F % $ ) % 4 ( $ ( ) % ) + 4 % K G 9 @ H S F 8 5 8 B 0 S 5 : : L 0 % + % 2 % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ < > < + 2 > + ( ) ( % $ % 2 $ ( $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 3 % % 2 $

PAGE 60

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n n G % $ 6 $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n ) % $ % 2 $ % 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) 6 $ + % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 5 $ ) 4 ( % 2 $ ) $ 6 ( 3 $ ) ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ @ 5 3 $ @ / $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % 3 A $ % ) H % $ $ $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( $ $ 8 8 5 8 5 G 5 ; H 5 C G 5 C H 8 5 G 5 : : @ H 8 5 8 : G 5 C : : H 8 5 G 5 : B H 8 5 @ G 5 C 8 C H ) 4 ( % + 2 5 5 B G 5 9 B 9 H 5 B G 5 @ ; H 5 B G 5 : ; H 8 5 G 5 9 @ H 8 5 9 ; G 8 5 9 ; H 8 5 G 5 9 B H 5 8 5 G 5 9 9 8 H 8 5 G 5 : : H 5 : @ G 5 @ H 8 5 G 5 9 9 8 H 8 5 C ; G 5 : ; H 8 5 8 8 G 5 H ) 4 5 + 2 5 5 B 9 G 5 ; @ H 5 C G 5 ; H 8 5 @ G 5 @ ; H 8 5 ; G 5 C : 9 H 5 B 9 G 5 : : H 8 5 G 5 H / ( $ 2 $ ! 0 % 2 $ ( $ ( $ % % 4 % % $ ) % 2 % 3 $ ( $ + J $ 5 $ ( 4 $ % ( $ + % 4 ( ! ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ ( % $ ! ( $ ) % $ 6 $ 4 5 4 ( % 2 % $ ! 5

PAGE 61

C 2 $ ( $ ) ) + 4 % $ $ & ) 4 ( % & % $ 6 $ % $ ( % K G 0 B H S @ 5 9 B 0 T 5 8 H 5 2 ) % $ ( % ) ( $ ) $ % $ + ( $ : 0 " $ ) % ( % $ ) % 2 % 0 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 2 + 2 $ ( ( % + ) 4 ) % ) $ % % $ % 4 $ ( ( ( $ + % 4 % $ ) ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 5 n r r n r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n % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) ( $ 6 $ $ ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) 5

PAGE 62

C % r n r 0 n ) % $ % 2 $ 4 ) $ ( ( % $ 0 % 2 % $ 6 $ ) 4 ( % % ) $ ( 6 + ) 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( ) 5 ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) $ ( $ 3 ) $ ( 6 $ 5 3 $ B / $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G % 3 A $ % ) H ) $ ( r % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 5 8 5 C U 5 8 : G 5 @ C H ) 4 ( % + 2 5 B 5 9 U 5 G 8 5 8 H 5 8 8 5 C U 5 G 5 B : H ) 4 5 + 2 5 8 8 5 8 U 5 9 9 G 5 ; B H n 0 n n G % $ 6 $ M + 2 % 0 % H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M ) + + $ ) % $ $ % ( 6 5 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 6 5 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( ) H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n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

PAGE 63

C 9 2 $ ( $ ) ) + 4 % % & $ $ % $ ( % K G 9 0 B H S : 5 ; 8 ; 0 T 5 8 L 5 n 0 G % $ 6 $ M + 2 % 0 % H & G ) 4 ( % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & ; G $ ) % M 8 F ; H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n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n n 2 $ ) % % + 4 % 2 $ $ % ) 3 A $ % ) % % + ( ) ( + % 2 $ $ ) % ( % $ % 2 % % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 ( % $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) ) ( $ $ % ( $ ) + 4 % 4 4 $ ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % 2 % 2 ) $ 2 ( % $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) ) $ ) ) $ % 5 % ) $ $ % 2 $ % ( $ ( % 2 $ , ) $ ) 0 % 2 ) % $ ( + % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ % % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 2 ( % $ % < ; > ( 2 + 2 $ ( % 2 $ % ) $ 5 2 ) ( $ $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ < % F

PAGE 64

C C ) 4 ( % > % 4 ( C % 8 0 ( $ $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ < % F ) 4 ( % > % 4 ( C % 8 ; 5 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ 2 + $ ) % ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ $ % ( % ) 5 n 1 n 2 $ 4 ( ) % 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) % $ ) % $ 4 ( % 2 $ ) $ $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ $ " % ) $ % ) % ) 4 ( % 2 $ $ % ( $ % ) $ % 0 % 2 % $ ( ) ) $ ( $ $ % 2 $ < % ) > % 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % G $ % ( 6 ) 5 $ ( 2 $ ( H & $ $ G 8 6 ) 5 6 ) 5 H + ( $ 5 2 $ ) $ $ ( ) ) ) 2 $ " 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) 4 ( $ 2 % & $ $ $ 5 2 ) 0 % 2 $ 4 ( ) % 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) + % ) ' ( % $ 5 n n 2 n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n nn

PAGE 65

C ; r n r n r 3 n 0 $ ) 4 ( ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % ( % + ) 4 ( $ 2 % ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ 8 5 3 $ 8 / $ ) % ( $ 6 % ) 4 ( $ 4 F r $ ( % r % + ) G r $ $ 3 A $ % H $ 4 F r $ ( % r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n n G + $ % % $ $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n ) % $ % 2 $ ( $ $ " % ) $ % 5 % 4 ( % 2 ) , ) ) ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ 8 5 2 $ ( $ ) ) + 4 % % & ) $ $ & ) 4 ( % % $ ( % K G 0 8 C H S 5 @ @ ; 0 T 5 C L 5 2 ) % $ ( % ) ( $ ) $ % $

PAGE 66

C : 3 $ 8 / $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r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

PAGE 67

C @ n r r n r + ( $ @ V $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ + % 4 $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 ) % 3 ) 4 ( % % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H ( $ + % 4 % $ ) ( $ ) $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ 6 ) ) $ $ ) 5 2 $ ) $ ( % $ n % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) ( $ 6 $ $ ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) 5 % r n r 0 n n n ) % $ % 2 $ 4 ) $ ( ( % $ 0 % 2 + $ % % $ $ ) 4 ( % % ) $ ( 6 + ) 3 $ % $ $ F ) 3 A $ % ) 4 % ( ) 5 ) + 4 % $ 4 4 $ % ) ( % $ ( % ) $ ( $ 3 ) $ ( 6 $ 5 3 $ 8 9 / $ 6 $ ) ) % ( " $ 6 % ) 4 ( ) $ ( ) $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H ) $ ( r % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) % B 5 9 U 5 G 8 5 8 H ) 4 ( % $ % ( 8 5 9 U 5 @ G 5 : C B H % 8 8 5 8 U 5 9 9 G 5 ; B H ) 4 5 $ % ( 8 5 U 5 G 5 : : H n

PAGE 68

C B 0 n n G + $ % % $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G $ $ M 8 0 0 H & G % M ) + + $ ) % $ $ % ( 0 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 0 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( ) H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n ) % $ 4 ( ) 4 ( % % $ ) 5 2 $ % 4 ( % 2 ) , ) ) ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ 8 C 5 3 $ 8 C / $ 6 $ ) 4 ( . $ % $ 4 ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( 0 $ % ( 0 $ ( ) % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 ) 4 ( % % G r $ $ 3 A $ % H % $ $ $ ( 2 $ ( $ % ( $ ( ) $ $ 8 8 8 5 5 @ G 5 C ; H 5 ; B G 5 9 @ H 5 C 9 G 5 C 8 B H 5 8 G 5 9 @ H 5 C 9 G 5 C 8 B H 5 8 C G 5 : ; H 5 ; B G 5 9 @ H 5 G 5 H 5 C 9 G 5 C 8 B H ) 4 5 $ % 5 5 ; G 5 9 B H 5 9 G 5 C H 5 C G 5 C 8 H 5 8 G 5 H 5 C G 5 C 8 H 5 G 5 9 : ; H 5 ; @ G 5 9 : ; H 5 G 5 9 @ H 5 9 G 5 C H / ( $ 2 $ ! 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ ) + + $ ) % $ % $ 5 2 $ ( $ 4 ( $ 0 $ 2 6 $ , ) 3 $ ( $ ) $ ( $ % + $ 5 ( $ & $ 0 % 2 $ 6 $ < 5 9 > , ) 3 $ ( $ % 2 % 9 U 4 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 % % < ( $ + J $ > % 2 $ ) + + $ ) % $ % $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) ) + 4 % % & $ $ W + $ % % $ $ % $ ( % K G 9 0 8 9 9 H S 5 C C 0 T 5 C L 5 2 ) % $ ( % ) ( $ ) $ % $ + ( $ ) B 0 8 0 8 8 5 2 $ % $ ( % ) + + $ ) % ) % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 % 2 $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ $ ( $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % % 2 % $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) ) ) + 4 % % & $ $ % $ ( % K G 9 0 8 9 9 H S 8 ; 5 8 C 0 T 5 8 L 5 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % 4 ( % ' ( 2 $ ) + 4 $ K G 0 : H S 5 @ @ B 0 S 5 ; @ L 5 n 0 G + $ % % $ M % 0 $ % ( H & G ) 4 ( % M ) 4 ( % 0 ) 4 ( % H & ; G $ ) % M 8 F ; H ( $ $ % $ $ ) ( $ ) n ) % $ % 2 $ ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) % 2 % ) $ 3 $ 2 6 ( % 6 ( ) % ) ( + % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 2 $ % 4 ( % 2 ) , ) ) ( $ ( $ ) $ % $ 3 $ 8 ; 5

PAGE 69

; n r r n r + ( $ B V $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H n r r n r + ( $ 8 V $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ % ( % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H

PAGE 70

; 8 n r r n r + ( $ 8 8 V $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ) + + $ ) % $ $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) % $ ( < ( $ + J $ > 3 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) % 3 + $ % % $ $ G r $ $ 3 A $ % H 3 $ 8 ; / $ 6 $ ) 4 ( ( ( $ % ( $ ) ) $ ) % ; ( $ I ) $ % $ ) 0 ( $ ) $ % $ 4 ( $ 2 % G r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

PAGE 71

; r 9 n r 3 n n 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) = ) $ 4 ( $ ( % ( $ ) ) $ ) % % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) $ ( $ ) $ & $ % $ 0 % 2 % % 2 ) $ 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ % $ $ % ( % $ % ) 3 $ + ( $ $ % ( $ % $ ( $ ) % + % 2 % 2 ) $ 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ 5 n $ ( $ ) % % 2 % ) ) $ 2 % $ & $ % $ ) % 2 $ ( $ % 6 $ ! + ( $ 4 ( % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 6 $ + % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 0 ( $ + ( + 2 $ % % 2 $ 4 % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ % 3 $ 5 2 ) ( $ ) % 0 3 $ % 2 % 2 $ ( $ % 6 $ 2 + 2 6 ( 3 % % 2 % 2 $ + ( 4 ( % 2 ) 6 ( 3 $ 0 " % ( $ 6 $ % % 2 $ $ % + ( = ) 6 $ ( ! ) ( $ 4 ( 3 $ + ) + 4 % 2 + 2 $ ( % 2 % 2 $ $ % ( + ( = ) ) ( $ 5 % $ ) $ ) % ( % $ % 2 % 0 % 2 % 2 $ $ % + ( 0 % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ % 2 ) $ 2 4 % 2 $ % $ % 3 $ E % $ $ % 0 % 2 ) $ 2 4 % 2 $ % $ % % 3 $ 6 $ ( $ % % ! 5 n $ ( % % ) $ % 4 % 2 ) ( $ ) $ ( 2 ) % 2 % % ) % 2 $ 6 = ) $ ( ) ( $ ) ) $ % $ 6 $ % 0 % % 2 $ < > $ % % $ + ( % 2 2 $ 6 $ % 3 $ + ) 0 % 2 % 4 $ $ ) ) 3 ) $ E $ % $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 5 ) $ E $ % 0 % 2 $ 6 ( 3 % ( % $ $ % % 2 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ % $ % ! ( $ 4 $ % ) + 4 % 6 ( 3 % ( $ + ( + % 2 $ ( % $ ( $ ( 4 ( $ % 2 $ $ ( % ) # ) 5 $ $ 0 2 $ % 2 $ $ % + ( ) ) % % + ( ) $ $ + % 2 $ ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % ( % + 4 (

PAGE 72

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n $ ) % % $ % 2 % % 2 ) $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 ( % $ % 2 $ < $ % > 6 + $ % % $ ) 3 $ + ( $ $ % ! 2 6 $ ( % $ % 2 $ ) $ 6 $ ) ) 3 $ + ( $ ( ) 3 $ 0 ) 2 % 2 $ 2 6 $ 3 $ $ + 6 $ % 2 $ ) $ $ ) ( $ % 2 % ( $ ) K ; L ) $ 5 2 $ + % 2 $ ( + 4 % 2 ) ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % % 2 ) ( % % ) $ ) 4 ( % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % $ ( 5 ( ) % 0 ) 2 % , ! % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % $ ( % . % 4 ( ) + 4 % ) ( $ 4 6 ( 3 % % 2 $ % 5 $ 0 ) 2 % ( 6 $ $ ) % % ( 4 ( % 2 $ ) % F 4 4 $ ( $ $ 4 " ) ) ) $ $ ( $ ( 5 2 $ ( + ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 6 5 $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ ) 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) 4 2 $ % % $ % + % 2 % 2 $ ) J $ % 2 $ ) ( $ 4 + ( 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 5 2 ) $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ $ % 4 4 $ ( $ $ $ % % 0 3 % % 2 $ ( $ ( $ ) + 4 % ) % 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 % ) % $ % ! . % 4 ( % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 5 % 2 + 2 ( # $ 0 $ $ ( 0 N r $ ) 3 $ ( + K 8 L ( + $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ 4 $ 6 $ $ ( + $ ) % 2 % ) 2 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % % ( 3 % $ % % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % ) 4 $ % 0 % 2 $ ) + ( $ $

PAGE 73

; 9 % 2 % 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) ) % % ) 3 $ + ( $ 5 % 2 $ ) $ 4 4 4 $ ( + $ + ( $ $ ) 4 $ % % 0 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ 6 $ $ % 2 $ ) $ ) % M % 2 $ ) 2 6 $ 4 4 $ ( + $ 6 $ ) 4 $ % ( $ ) ) $ % % 5 ) $ E $ % 0 + ( 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 ) $ ( 6 $ 3 $ % % ( 3 % $ % % 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % ) 4 $ % % 2 ( $ $ ( % % 5 % 2 ) ( $ ) $ % 0 % ) 4 ( % % ) % 2 % ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % % $ ( $ + % 2 $ ( $ 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % $ & $ ( $ % 5 $ 6 $ ( 0 3 $ ) $ % 2 $ % $ ( $ + % 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ $ & ) $ % % 2 $ ) % ) 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) % 2 $ + $ ( 4 4 ! + % ( ( ( $ ) + ( $ + ( + 2 ) 2 % ) % 3 $ % $ ( ( $ % $ 5 2 ) ! 3 $ ) ) ) $ % $ ( 5 n $ % 2 $ ( ( $ ) % 4 % $ ( $ ) % ( $ + ( + % 2 $ ) $ 4 F ( $ ( % % ) % 2 $ $ ( $ % ( % + ) 3 $ % $ $ + ( ) ( $ + ( + 2 $ ! % 2 $ 3 $ $ 6 $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ $ 3 $ ( $ % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 % ) ( % % % % $ % 2 % % 2 ) ( % + ) % # $ 3 $ 4 ( $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ ( $ ) # $ % ( $ ! ( ( $ + J $ % 2 + 3 % % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 4 % ( $ ) % $ ) 0 % 3 $ ) $ 4 % ) # % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) % ( % $ % 2 $ ( $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 3 % 2 3 $ 4 ( $ 4 % $ ( % 2 $ $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ ! ( $ + % % $ ) % ) 5 2 $ ) % F % $ ) % ( % + 3 $ ( + 2 $ E 6 $ % % ( $ 6 ) ) % $ ) % 2 % ( % $ % 2 $ 4 $ $ % 2 2 2 ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ ( % $ 2 % % 2 $ ( $ $ 3 $ ( $ 5 # n n n $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % ) % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 2 6 $ ) $ ( ( ( $ + % 4 ( $ % ( % $ ) 0 4 $ ( ( ( $ + % 4 ( $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) 0 ( $ % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ 5 2 ) 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) % ) ' ( % $ 3 % 2 $ ( $ ) % ) 5 2 $ + $ % % $ $ 4 % ( G % 6 5 $ % ( H " % % $ ( % ) + 4 % % 2 4 % 2 $ < 2 % ) > 6 ( 3 $ ) % 2 $ $ ) + 4 ( $ % 2 $ ( % 2 $ $ % ( $

PAGE 74

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

PAGE 75

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n ( $ + % 4 ( % $ ) $ ( % ( ) % $ ) 5 2 $ ( $ ) % ( % 6 $ % ( $ 4 $ ( ( 6 $ $ & , % 4 ( % 2 $ ) + + $ ) % % 2 % ) 4 ( % ( 6 $ ) ( $ + % ) $ ) % % ) 0 ( ) ( $ + % % 2 $ ( ) 5 4 E $ ) % % 2 % 6 6 $ ) % + ) 4 ( % ) $ ) % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % % ( $ ) % ( % $ ( ( $ ( % ) $ ( % 2 $ E $ ) % 0 % 2 % ( $ ) % ( % , % $ ( % 2 $ ( ) $ % ) 4 % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % = ) ( $ ! $ % 5 ( $ & $ 0 $ ( $ I ) $ E $ ) % % 2 % % % $ % ) % % ) 4 ( % ( $ ) / < % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 0 % 2 $ ( 3 $ % 2 $ $ % $ ( % 3 $ ) ) % 2 $ 5 > ) 3 A $ % 0 4 % $ ( ( $ + % 2 ) E $ ) % 0 ( $ ) % ( % $ ( 4 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ ( $ ( % $ % $ ( $ 4 ( ) $ ( % 2 $ $ % $ ( % 3 $ 5 2 ) ( $ ) % ( % 6 6 $ % 2 $ ( $ % ( $ 6 4 % 2 $ ( % $ ) ( ( % 2 $ $ % $ ( % 3 $ 0 2 2 % $ % ! ( 6 $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % = ) ( $ + % 4 % 2 ) $ % $ ) % $ ( 5 % 2 $ ( E $ ) % ( $ ) / < 2 $ % 2 $ . 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 2 3 $ $ $ $ 5 > 2 ) E $ ) % $ ) 3 A $ % % ( $ ) % ( % $ ( 4 % 2 $ . 2 ( $ ( % $ % $ ( $ 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) % 2 $ . 2 5 2 ) ( $ ) % ( % ) % # $ %

PAGE 76

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

PAGE 77

; @ n n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n n 2 $ ) $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % ) % 2 % 0 % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % 0 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 3 $ ( $ # $ % . $ %

PAGE 78

; B ) 4 ( % ( $ + ( + $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) G % 2 % ) 0 ) + + $ ) % % 2 % % $ ) ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ $ ( 2 $ ( 4 % 2 $ + $ H 0 $ ) ) # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ + ( + $ % ( % $ ) 0 % 2 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ 5 % 2 ( $ ) $ % % % 2 $ ( $ $ " % ) $ % 0 % 2 ) 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) ( % ! ) ' ( % $ 5 2 $ ) + 4 % % $ ( % % 2 % ) + $ $ ( % $ ) + + $ ) % ) % 2 % ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ ( % $ % ) 3 $ + ( $ $ % $ ( $ ( $ # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ + ( + $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) 0 3 % % 2 ) ' $ ( $ % 3 $ % 2 $ ) $ 2 $ % ( $ + ( $ % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 5 % ) ( % % % % $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ ( ) ) $ $ ) $ % ) + 4 % ( $ ) % 4 ( % 2 ) ( ) 0 ) ) 2 % ) 2 3 $ % $ ( ( $ % $ % 2 % 5 % ) $ ( 2 ) ) + 4 % % 2 % % 2 ) ) $ $ % $ % 2 $ ( % $ $ $ % 2 2 % 2 $ , ' $ ( $ % ) % 2 $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) 4 4 $ ( $ $ 0 2 $ 6 $ ( 0 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 ( $ ) $ % % . $ % $ 4 ) 4 ( % 3 % $ % ( % $ ) ( $ ( ) F $ % $ ( $ % $ ) 5 % 2 $ ( ( ) 0 ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ $ ( $ $ ) ) # $ % . $ % ) 4 ( % ( $ + ( + $ % ( % $ ) 5 2 ) ( % 4 % 2 $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) ) % ) ' ( % $ 5 2 $ ( $ ) % ) 4 % 2 $ , ) ) 4 ) 4 ( % % ) 2 % 2 % % ) % 4 4 % % + $ % ) 3 A $ % ) % < ( $ + J $ > % $ ) % 2 % $ ( $ $ ( $ ) + + $ ) % $ % % 2 $ 5 ( % 2 $ ) % ( % 0 2 $ 6 $ ( 0 % 2 $ ( $ $ ( $ ) + 4 % 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ 5 2 $ ) $ % ) + 4 % 4 4 $ ( $ $ 3 $ % $ $ $ % $ % ( ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 4 ( $ ( 2 $ ( $ ) 3 $ $ % % 2 $ 4 % % 2 % ( % ( $ % $ 6 $ % . ( ( $ % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 5 % 3 $ % 2 % % % # ) 2 % $ % $ 6 $ % % ( $ % 2 $ < ( ( + > $ 4 4 $ % 2 % 2 $ ) J $ 3 ( $ ) $ ( 2 $ ( ) ) 2 ) ( # $ 0 $ $ ( 0 N r $ ) 3 $ ( + K 8 L 5

PAGE 79

: ) ) ) + % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 0 % ) ( % % % % $ % 2 % 4 % 2 $ % $ ( % ) % $ ( $ 6 6 $ ( " 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 % $ & ) % % 2 % ) $ $ 0 ( $ % % 2 $ 4 ( ) % % 2 ( ) $ $ ) 5 % ) ) % # $ % . $ $ % 2 % % 2 $ ) % ) % % 6 $ $ 6 $ % ! % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 0 % 2 $ ) 0 . ( ) % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ 5 n $ ( + $ % 0 A ) % % $ 0 ) % 2 % % 2 $ ) % 2 % . ( ) % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ ( $ , ( ( + 4 % % $ % 5 2 ) ( + $ % ( $ ) ' ) $ ) % 2 % % ) % 2 $ $ % $ $ $ % 4 % 2 $ $ 6 $ % % 2 % ( $ ) % 2 $ ( ( + 4 % % $ % 0 % 2 ) ( $ ) % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) ( $ + % ) 4 ( % . $ % $ 5 % 2 $ ( 2 $ $ % 2 % % $ % ! $ & % 2 $ % $ ( % ) % 2 % ( $ 6 6 $ ( % 2 ) ) $ $ ) % 2 $ 6 r $ ) % ( 4 4 $ 4 4 $ % K B L 5 n $ $ & $ 4 % 2 ) $ 4 4 $ % ) ) # + ) 3 A $ % ) % $ ( J $ ) % ( + 4 $ % % $ ( ) 0 2 2 2 6 $ 3 $ ( % 2 $ " $ G $ 5 + 5 E $ ( : % H 5 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % ) 4 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ + ( $ % $ ( ( $ ! 4 ( % 2 $ 3 $ ( 0 2 2 ) % ) % % 2 $ " $ 4 % 2 $ ) % ( + 0 % 2 4 ( % 2 $ $ % % $ ( ) 5 % ) 2 3 $ % $ % 2 % % 2 ) $ 4 4 $ % ) 3 ) $ " ) % % 6 $ $ ) ) 6 $ % 0 ( % 2 $ ( % 2 $ % % 5 % 2 $ % $ & % 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % 0 % 2 $ 6 r $ ) % ( 4 4 $ 4 4 $ % " $ ) % ( % $ % ) $ 4 3 ) $ $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ $ 6 $ % 4 % 2 $ ) 0 6 $ ( ) ) $ ( 4 % 2 $ ( 3 $ 2 6 ( ) $ ( 4 ( $ 3 % 2 $ % ( ) % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 4 ( % % $ 0 $ ( 4 ( % 2 $ ) % ) $ 4 ) % ) $ 0 ( % 3 $ ) $ % . ( ( $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 5 n $ % 2 % % 2 ) 2 6 $ 3 $ $ $ % % 2 3 $ % 2 6 $ E $ ) % % 2 $ ( $ I ) $ % $ ) % % 2 % ) $ 3 $ 2 6 ( $ % $ % 2 % 2 $ ) 0 2 2 ) . ( ( $ % 2 $ $ % ( ) $ $ 5 ( $ & $ 0 3 % 2 6 + $ % % $ ) % 2 $ ) % % 2 $ " $ 4 % 2 $ ) $ ) $ $ M % 2 $ $ % ) $ $ % ) % 2 $ 0 % 2 $ $ % ( ) $ $ % ) % $ ) 3 6 $ , ) $ % 5 2 ) 3 $ 2 6 ( 2 6 $ 3 $ $ ) $ 0 % 2 % 2 $ $ & $ % % % 2 % ( $ + % 4 (

PAGE 80

: 8 % 3 $ 3 $ % % $ ( 4 ( ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 0 6 $ ( ) ) ) 3 A $ % ) 2 6 $ $ % 2 $ $ % ( 6 + $ % % $ 5 ( $ ) + 4 ( * $ % % 2 % % 2 $ 6 r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n n % n n 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % 2 ) ) $ 6 $ ( $ % 2 + ! % % ) % 2 % 2 3 % 4 ! $ ( ) % + 4 % 2 $ ( $ ) % ) % 2 % 2 6 $ 3 $ $ + $ $ ( % $ 5 2 ) ) $ % ! % $ % 2 $ ) $

PAGE 81

: % % ) % % $ % % ( 6 $ ) % ) % 2 % # $ 4 ! F ) % $ ) ( $ ( % 6 $ 5 4 r n 0 n n n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n ) % . % 4 ( 4 + 6 ( 3 $ ) % 2 % $ & ) % $ ( ( % % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % % 0 % 2 $ ( ) $ 4 6 " 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % ) % $ % $ ( $ ( $ F $ & ) % + 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 4 % 2 $ 6 ) 3 A $ % ) % 2 % , 4 4 $ % 2 % 2 $ $ ( 4 ( ( + % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % 5 2 ) 0 % $ ( ) 4 3 % + 6 " 4 4 $ ( $ $ 4 ( % 0 % ) ( % + % 2 $ ( ) 2 % % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) $ & ) $ % % 2 $ ) % ) 5

PAGE 82

: 6 " 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 3 $ + % 2 $ ( $ 3 $ ( 4 4 % ( ) 5 n $ 4 % ( 3 $ + % 2 $ $ ) 4 % 2 $ < ( ) 3 % > 4 % ( + % 2 $ ( $ 3 ( $ ) K ; L 0 $ % $ ( + 2 $ ) % ) 4 ( % 2 $ 6 % 3 $ $ + ( 0 ( % 2 $ ( ) $ $ % ! 4 $ 5 % 2 $ ( 4 % ( % 2 % 3 $ ( % % ) % 2 $ $ & % $ % % 2 2 6 2 ) 6 6 + % 0 ( % 2 $ $ ) $ % 2 2 2 6 ( $ % $ $ % + $ ) 5 n $ 2 % 2 $ ) ) 3 $ % 2 % 6 ) % 2 ( % ( 6 6 + % ) 3 $ ( $ ) ) $ % 3 $ % ) 4 ( % 5 $ ) $ % 2 $ $ ) ( $ % $ $ % + $ 0 % 2 $ 3 $ ( $ ( $ % ( $ % + ) 2 + $ ( $ ) ) $ % ) 4 ( % % $ ) 0 ) $ E $ % ( $ # $ % # $ $ ( ( ( 4 ( $ % % ( + 0 4 ) $ % 2 $ ( $ % % ( $ % 2 % 2 $ % $ ( 4 % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ 5 % 2 $ ( 4 % ( 3 $ % 3 + ( 2 % ( $ 5 6 $ % 2 % % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ 2 + $ ) ) ) $ ) 4 $ ) % 6 $ $ 0 6 ) = ( ( $ & $ ( $ $ % 2 % 2 $ ) $ ) ) $ ) 3 $ ) + 4 % 5 ( $ & $ 0 ) 3 A $ % 2 4 % 2 ) 0 ( 2 2 ) 3 $ $ 3 ) 6 $ ( $ % ) 2 ) 0 3 $ $ & $ % $ % 2 6 $ ) % ( + $ ( ( $ % % % 2 $ $ % 6 + $ % % $ % 2 , ) 3 A $ % % 2 ) 2 $ & $ ( $ $ 5 2 $ ) ( $ ) 3 $ 4 % ( $ % % 2 $ $ ) + ) 6 ( % $ 5 ) 0 % 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % $ ( # ) 3 % 6 ) 3 A $ % ) ( ( % % 2 $ $ & $ ( $ % % 0 % 2 $ ( $ % 2 $ ! 3 $ 3 $ % ( $ % 3 % % 2 $ ( $ ) % ) 0 % 2 $ 3 $ % % $ ( % 2 $ ! 3 $ 3 $ % $ & % 2 $ ( $ ) % + % 5 r n 4 0 n r n r 0 n n # + $ % $ ( % ) ( $ + ( + 2 $ % 2 $ ( ( % ( % ( % $ ) < $ % ( > % % 2 $ ) $ $ ( < $ ( 2 $ ( > % % 2 $ ) $ $ 0 % 2 $ ) $ ( % + 6 $ ) ) % % ( $ 5 n 3 A $ % ) % 2 % $ ( $ $ % 2 $ ( % % % 2 % 2 $ % ( ) 0 ( $ ( $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ % ( ) 0 $ ( $ $ % $ ( $ % 3 $ < $ % ( 0 > 2 $ 3 A $ % ) % 2 % $ ( $ 4 4 % % 2 $ ) $ 4 $ % 2 $ ( % ( $ ( $ $ % $ ( $ % 3 $ < $ ( 2 $ ( 5 > 3 $ ( 4

PAGE 83

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

PAGE 84

: C % $ ) $ ( $ ( $ . ( % $ ( $ + J $ % 2 $ ( 2 $ ( % $ ) 0 ) + + $ ) % + % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ $ % % 2 $ ) $ $ " 2 6 $ % 2 ( $ % 2 $ ) 3 A $ % ) ( $ + J $ % 2 $ 5 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % $ & $ ( $ % 0 % 3 $ ) % 2 % % ! ) 4 ( % ) < ( $ % $ $ E 5 > ) $ ) % $ ) 0 % 2 $ ) 4 ( % ) 4 4 $ ( $ ( ( $ % 4 ( % 5 % 2 $ ( ) % $ ) 0 % ( $ % % ( % $ 2 % ) % ! ( $ ) $ % % 2 $ 6 + $ % % $ ) 5 ) 2 ) ( $ 3 $ $ % $ 0 4 ( $ & $ 0 $ 4 % 2 $ ) 4 ( % % $ ) ) % % $ ) % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ ) 3 + 4 2 ) % 2 $ % $ ( ) $ $ 5 % % 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) % $ % % 2 $ ( $ 0 % 2 ) $ 4 ( 3 + 5 % 2 ) ) % $ 0 % 2 $ 0 % 2 $ ) 4 ( % ( $ % % ( % ) % 2 $ 4 % ) 0 2 2 , 4 4 $ % 3 % 2 % ) # $ 2 4 3 $ + . $ % $ 0 % 2 $ ) 3 ) $ E $ % ( $ + % 4 % 2 $ ( $ % $ 5 2 ) ) 4 4 $ ( $ % 4 ( % 2 $ ( ) 4 ( % 0 2 2 ) + + $ ) % % 2 % % $ ) ( $ ) $ % 2 $ 4 % % ) % 5 2 $ ) $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) % 2 $ < % $ > 4 ) 4 ( % 0 3 $ ) $ % 2 $ $ ( $ % . % $ 4 ( % 2 $ % $ ) + 0 % ( $ 4 ) 2 $ $ 4 4 ( % ) ( $ % $ ( $ % $ & 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) 3 $ % $ $ ) 4 ( % 4 4 $ ( $ % ) $ $ ) 5 4 % ( $ ) % $ ) 0 % 3 $ ( % % % $ % 2 $ ( $ ) ( $ % 2 % ! ) + + $ ) % $ ) 4 ( % ) 4 % 2 $ ) $ # 0 ( # $ % 2 $ 4 4 $ ( $ $ ) ) 4 ( % G 5 $ 5 % $ ( $ ) $ % I % $ 3 ) $ % 6 ) 5 ( $ % $ I ) + + $ ) % $ % $ H % 2 $ ( % 2 F ) 3 A $ % ) 6 ( 3 $ 5 r n 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % 2 ) ) + 2 % % 4 $ % 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ . $ % ) 4 $ % $ ( ) 4 ( % . $ % $ 5 n % 2 $ ( 0 % 2 $ ) $ . $ % ) ( $ % $ $ + 2 5 3 + % 2 $ 3 $ 2 ! $ + $ % 2 % ) % % $ ) 6 $ ( % ( + + 0 % % $ ) 6 $ ( 4 ( ) % ( % + 5 ( % + $ & $ ( $ % % 2 % $ ) $ ( A ) % $ $ 6 % 3 ! $ ) % $ & ) 4 6 ( 3 $ ) " $ ! % + $ " $ ) + 5 2 $ % 2 $

PAGE 85

: ; ( + $ % ) 4 $ ) 0 % 2 $ ( $ ) % 2 $ + $ ( 4 # + % 2 $ < $ ( > $ ) ( $ ) $ % 2 + % 2 % . ( % 2 $ 3 ( % ( 5 + % 2 $ 3 $ 3 $ % $ $ % 2 $ ) $ $ & % ( $ $ ) ) $ 4 % 2 $ ) % 2 ! $ + + ) $ % ) 4 ( $ ) $ ( 2 + % 2 ) ( $ 0 $ % 2 % % ) 2 $ 2 ) 3 $ $ ) 4 4 $ % $ % 2 $ ( $ 5 % ) 2 $ % 2 % % 2 $ ( $ ) $ % ) % 2 ) $ ) % ( % $ % 2 % $ % $ ( ) 4 ( % . $ % $ ( $ . $ % ) % 2 % $ ) $ ( 6 $ % 3 $ ) $ ( $ . $ ( % 0 % 2 % 4 ( % 2 $ ( ) % % 2 ) ( $ ) % $ ( % $ 0 3 % ) % $ % ! 6 $ ( ( $ ( + 5

PAGE 86

: : r r 8 5 r # $ ! 0 r 5 5 G 8 B B C H 5 ) ) $ $ % 5 r 0 ! # $ 0 8 F @ 5 5 ! ) 0 5 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 G 8 B : C H 5 ) ( $ + F % 6 % % 2 $ ( 4 ) $ % ( $ ) ) + 5 r r % n 0 & 0 9 : 5 9 @ 5 5 1 $ # ) 0 1 5 1 5 G 8 B : 9 0 6 $ 3 $ ( H 5 r $ $ 3 $ ( % 2 % % 2 $ ( 4 $ ( D $ ! 0 4 ( + $ % % X r 0 : @ C F : B C 5 9 5 3 0 1 5 5 ) 2 $ ( 0 5 G 8 B @ H 5 ) $ ( ) 2 $ % D r r r r 0 ( # $ 0 F 8 5 C 5 % ( 2 $ ( 0 5 5 0 2 6 0 5 5 0 2 0 5 5 G 8 B B H 5 4 ( % ( $ ) ) + ) % ( % $ + $ ) ) $ ( 2 % 2 $ ) ) % $ ) % + / 2 $ ( $ 4 ) $ $ % 6 $ $ ( $ & $ % 5 r ) r r 0 # + $ 0 9 ; C F 9 : 5 ; 5 1 2 ) 0 5 5 0 r $ 0 5 5 G 8 B @ 8 H 5 r $ % % ( + 5 r r % n 0 & & $ 0 ; : F @ C 5 : 5 1 3 0 5 5 0 $ ! $ 0 5 5 0 ( 0 1 5 0 1 ) $ 2 # 0 1 5 G 8 B @ B H 5 $ + 4 ) 6 $ ( + 2 % / % ) % 2 $ 3 % % 6 ) ) 4 $ $ ) 4 % 2 $ ) % 5 r r r r 0 0 ; F @ 5 @ 5 1 2 ) 0 5 5 0 ) % ( 0 5 0 " ) 0 5 5 G 8 B B H 5 ( $ % ( + 5 r r r r 0 , + $ 0 F @ 5 B 5 2 $ ( 0 1 5 5 0 $ ( 2 ( 0 5 0 4 % ) 0 5 5 G 8 B @ ; H 5 % $ ) 4 % 2 $ ( $ 5 r / 0 r r 1 2 3 4 3 ) 0 $ 0 8 : 8 F 8 @ 8 5 8 5 ) 0 5 5 0 1 2 ) 0 5 5 G 8 B B H 5 r % $ 4 4 ) $ ) ( $ % % ( 3 % ) $ $ ) 2 E $ ) % ) ( $ ) # $ 5 r r 0 5 + $ 0 C 9 8 F C C : 5 8 8 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 0 4 4 0 5 5 G 8 B @ B H 5 ) 4 ( % $ ( / 2 $ ( $ % 4 $ $ ( $ ) 5 r / 0 r r 1 6 r 0 , & $ 0 8 F 8 9 5

PAGE 87

: @ 8 5 O ( + J 0 5 5 0 $ 0 5 5 G 8 B B 9 H 5 ( $ ) % % ( 3 % ) % 2 $ ) + + $ ) % 3 % 4 $ $ % $ ) ) $ ( 5 r / 0 r r 1 2 3 4 3 ) 0 5 + $ 0 B 9 F B 9 C 5 8 5 $ ! 0 r 5 5 G 8 B @ B H 5 4 $ $ ) 4 ) $ + ) % $ 6 $ % 4 ( % / ) 4 ( % % $ ( 4 $ ( $ $ . $ % $ 5 r / 0 r r 1 6 r 0 , & 0 : F @ C 5 8 9 5 $ ( ) 0 5 0 2 $ ( 0 1 5 5 0 4 % ) 0 5 5 G 8 B @ : H 5 r 5 $ ( ( $ ) $ % $ % % 2 $ , $ $ % + 4 % 2 $ ) 2 . $ % 0 $ % % $ 0 5 8 C 5 # 0 5 G 8 B B 9 H 5 5 $ ( # / 2 ) % $ ( 5 8 ; 5 2 $ $ 2 0 5 5 0 ( + + 0 0 0 5 G 8 B @ 9 H 5 $ ( ) % ( % 4 ! + $ & ) ( $ % 4 ) $ 4 ( % 2 ) ) 5 r r r 0 ( # # $ 0 C B F ; C 5 8 : 5 $ ! $ + $ 0 5 G 8 B @ 8 H 5 ( % + % 2 $ % ) $ ) 4 ( ( $ & % $ + 2 % $ $ % / * $ % < r $ 4 % 2 $ 4 $ $ 3 # ) + $ $ % ( + ( 2 3 4 $ $ 3 # / 2 $ ( $ $ 6 $ 4 % % $ % > 3 ! ) 2 $ $ 2 5 r / 0 r r 1 6 r 0 , 5 $ 0 8 : F 8 5 8 @ 5 6 ) 0 5 1 5 G 8 B @ @ H 5 ) % 2 % $ ) / ) ) % 4 % $ & % % $ % 5 5 5 $ % % % G 5 H 7 4 5 $ ( # / 4 ( 0 ' 5 8 C : F 8 B 5 8 B 5 1 2 ) 0 5 5 0 $ 0 5 5 0 $ + ) 0 5 5 0 r $ 0 5 5 G 8 B @ @ H 5 2 $ $ 2 ( % $ ( ) % ) 4 $ ( $ ) 4 ( $ ( $ 6 $ " + $ % 3 + ( 2 $ 6 $ % ) 5 r / 0 r r 1 6 r 0 , + $ 0 : 8 F : ; 5 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 0 $ % 2 0 5 G 8 B B 9 H 5 4 % 4 5 $ ( # / % 5 ( % = ) ( $ ) ) 5 8 5 2 $ % ) % $ 0 5 ( ) ) 0 5 5 G 8 B B @ H 5 % ( 4 ) ) % $ % ) ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + % 2 + 2 % ) ' ( $ ) ) 5 0 + $ 5 5 ! ) $ ( + $ ( 0 5 0 $ # + $ ( 0 5 0 ! $ ( 0 5 G H 5 $ $ % ( 2 ) + % $ ) % 4 ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + / 2 $ ( $ 4 ( $ % ( $ 6 2 3 % 5 r ) n 0 0 B 9 F B 9 5 5 2 $ % ) % $ 0 5 0 ( ) ) 0 5 0 2 $ % ) % $ 0 5 G 8 B B ; H 5 2 3 % 0 % $ & % ) $ + ( $ + % 0 ) 3 A $ % ) % ( % $ + $ ) ) % $ % 2 " ( $ % $ 4 ( + $ % % + 5 ) ) 0 0 B C F 9 8 : 5

PAGE 88

: B 9 5 # ( ) # 0 5 G 8 B B C H 5 5 $ ( # / 2 # $ # ) 5 C 5 $ 2 $ ( 0 5 G 8 H 5 8 r 9 9 5 $ ( # / 2 # $ # ) 5 ; 5 ( 0 r 5 # 0 1 G 8 B : : H 5 ) 2 3 3 $ ( $ ) 5 ) 0 0 : F B B 5 : 5 ! $ $ ( 0 5 5 G 8 B @ 9 H 5 ) 2 3 3 $ ( $ ) 4 % 2 $ ) ) ) ) % % % $ % ( $ ) $ % r $ + 5 ) 0 0 ; F @ 5 @ 5 $ ) ) $ ( 0 5 ( ) 2 0 5 G 8 B B H 5 2 % 4 ) 2 3 3 ) / ) $ ( $ ! $ % ) 4 2 $ ( + % 2 $ $ ) 3 % ) r r 5 5 + ( N 5 $ ) ) $ ( G ) 5 H 0 % r r 1 : r r 4 ; G ' 5 B F 8 H 5 3 ( + $ / 3 ( + $ 6 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 5 B 5 2 ( ) % ) 0 5 5 G 8 B @ B H 5 ) 2 3 3 $ ( $ ) / $ 0 3 % % ) ) $ 5 4 ) 0 + $ 0 9 C F 9 9 5 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 0 2 ( ) % ) 0 5 5 G 8 B B 8 H 5 r $ $ 3 $ ( + $ % $ 6 $ % ) / 2 $ 4 % $ 4 $ % $ 4 ( % 5 ) / 0 $ 0 @ 8 F 8 @ 5 8 5 ( # $ 0 5 0 $ $ ( 0 5 0 r $ ) 3 $ ( + 0 5 G 8 B B H 5 r $ $ 3 $ ( + $ % $ 6 $ % ) 5 4 ) 0 5 # $ 0 : : F B 5 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 0 G 8 B : B H 5 / < 3 ( + $ 0 / ( 6 ( 6 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 5 5 ( % J 0 r 5 5 0 3 $ ( + 0 5 5 0 r 3 ) 0 5 5 G 8 B @ H 5 ( $ 2 ) ) 4 6 ) % % $ % 5 0 + 0 8 9 F 8 C 5 9 5 0 5 0 6 ) # ( # 0 r 5 0 . # 0 1 5 G 8 B : : H 5 4 4 $ % ) 4 ) % % ( + $ $ 2 ( $ A $ % ) ( $ % $ % 4 6 $ % ( + $ 5 n r r 0 5 0 8 B : F : 5 C 5 + 2 0 1 5 5 G 8 B B C H 5 % % 6 % 0 $ ( ( ) ) % $ ) 0 $ ( 5 5 5 2 % $ ( G 5 H 4 = 5 3 ( + $ / ( 6 ( 6 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 5 ; 5 ( $ ) 0 5 G 8 B B H 5 2 $ $ 4 4 $ % ) 4 $ % $ ( . ( 5 3 ) 2 $ 3 2 $ ( = ) % 2 $ ) ) 0 r $ $ ! $ + $ 0 ( % 0 n r 5 : 5 4 % ) 0 5 5 0 $ 0 1 5 0 ) 2 $ ! 0 r 5 G 8 B B C H 5 2 $ ( $ % 4 ! ) ( $ ( $ ) 5 5 5 2 % $ ( G 5 H 4 = 5 3 ( + $ / ( 6 ( 6 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 5

PAGE 89

@ @ 5 2 % $ ( 0 5 5 G 8 B B C H 5 $ ( ) % ( % / ) % ( ( ( $ % ) % % ) 5 5 5 2 % $ ( G 5 H 4 = < 3 ( + $ / ( 6 ( 6 $ ( ) % ( $ ) ) 5 B 5 6 ) 0 5 0 ( ) 0 5 5 0 0 O 5 0 ( $ 0 5 1 5 G H 5 % $ ( ( % 3 J ( ( $ $ ) ) $ 4 4 $ % ) % 2 $ ( $ ! 4 ) ( % F 3 ) $ % $ & % 5 4 0 & + $ 0 8 : F 9 5

PAGE 90

@ 8 n r % $ 6 $ % ) 3 % $ 2 ) 3 2 $ ( = ) $ + ( $ $ ) 2 + 4 ( % 2 $ 6 $ ( ) % 4 % 2 0 2 ) ) % $ ( = ) $ + ( $ $ ! ) 2 + 4 ( % 2 $ 6 $ ( ) % 4 ( 5 $ % $ ( $ % ( % % $ ) % 0 4 ( $ ) 4 % 2 % % 2 2 $ $ 0 ( 0 ( $ $ 6 $ ) $ ( 6 $ , ( 4 ( % 2 $ ( $ ( % $ % 4 2 ( $ $ ) 8 B B @ 5 ( 5 % ) 2 ) ( # $ ) $ 6 % ( ( + ( % 2 $ ( ) % 4 ( $ ( $ % $ % $ % $ ( ) $ 8 B B B 5 % 2 % % $ 0 2 $ 2 ) % $ 6 $ ( $ 6 % ) ( $ + ( + ) $ & ) ) $ ) 2 ( $ 0 $ ) $ % ) 0 " % ) 0 4 ( ) 2 + $ $ ) ) 0 % 2 $ A 6 $ $ ( % ) 0 % 2 $ $ ( % $ % 4 1 6 $ $ 1 ) % $ 0 " % ( 3 % 5 ( 5 % ) 2 ) + 6 $ ( $ ) $ % % ) % ) $ ( ) % $ 3 ( $ 6 $ % 2 3 ) $ $ ( + 5 $ 2 ) 3 $ $ % 2 $ ) ) ) % % ( $ % ( 4 % 2 $ $ & $ 6 ( + ( % $ ( $ % $ % $ % $ ( ) $ ( 2 5 ( 5 % ) ) 4 % $ 3 $ ( 4 $ ( + ) % % % $ 0 2 ) % + 2 % % ( + ) $ ( ) 4 ( % 2 $ % ( $ % $ % 4 ) $ & 4 4 $ $ ( ) 5


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0001432/00001

Material Information

Title: The Impact of Emotion on Memory and Misinformation Acceptance
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0001432:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0001432/00001

Material Information

Title: The Impact of Emotion on Memory and Misinformation Acceptance
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0001432:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text










THE IMPACT OF EMOTION ON MEMORY AND MISINFORMATION
ACCEPTANCE
















By

STEVEN KYLE KNAUTS


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2003
















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to my dissertation committee: Russell Bauer,

Joseph Alba, Bruce Crosson, Duane Dede, and Ira Fischler, for their patience and support.

I would like to express my particular appreciation to Dr. Bauer, who has shown patience

on a level with Job.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOW LEDGEM ENTS .......................................... ii

LIST O F TA BLE S ...................................... .............v..

LIST OF FIGURES ............... .. ............. ................... ...... vii

A B STR A C T ... ............. ............................................................ viii

CHAPTER

1. LITERATURE REVIEW................................... 1

Introduction .................. ................. ........................ ....... 1
Early M em ory Studies.............. ................... .......... ........... 2
C ontextualism ................. ................. ..................... ........ 3
Schem a Theory....................................................... ........ 4
M E M T heory ............... ...................................... .... ....... 7
Misinformation Acceptance.................. ........... 10
Hypnosis and the Effect of Suggestion ............................. .......... 14
Reality Monitoring and Repressed Memory Syndrome ..................... 16
"Pretend You Didn't Hear That" Directed Forgetting .................... 18
Stealing History: The Story ofBinjamin Wilkomirski...................... 19
Flashbulb M em ories ................. .............. ........... ............ 22
Em option in the Laboratory .......... ................. ...... ............. 25
H ypotheses .................. ................. ................ .. .... .... ..... 29
Capturing "Emotional Memory" An Unbreakable Conundrum?.......... 31

2. METHOD...... ............ ... ........... ........ 34

Subjects .............. ...................... .................... ........ .34
Equipm ent.................. .............. .......................... ....... 34
Design ................... .................... .................. .. ......... 34
Procedure........................................................ 39
D ata A nalysis.................................. ...................... .......... 40

3. R E SU L T S .............................................. ........ 43









Entire D ataset.................. ....... ............................ ...... .... 43
Comparing the Emotional Subjects........................................ 49
Reduced Dataset ............................................... ........... 54

4. DISCUSSION................................................................ 62

Self-Report Data ......... ..................................... ........... 62
"H its" D ata.................. ......................................... ..... 64
Story D ata.................... ....................................... ........ 68
Misinformation Data................. ........................ ............. 68
Limitations and Future Directions.............. ................. ......... 71
Conclusions ....................... ............................... ....... 75

REFERENCE LIST......................................................... .......... 77

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............................................. .............. 81
















LIST OF TABLES


Tables page

1. Demographic Characteristics of Each Group (Entire Subject Pool)........... 35

2. Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings and STAI
Scores (Entire Subject Pool).................................... ............. .. 45

3. Mean values and standard deviations for correct recognition of
peripheral and central items, presented for each condition
(Entire Subject Pool) .................. ............... .......... ... ...........45

4. Mean values for False Alarms and Person-Centered Items, presented
for each condition (Entire Subject Pool)........................................47

5. Mean values and standard deviations for acceptance of suggested
peripheral, central, and personal items, presented for each
Misinformation condition (Entire Subject Pool) .............................47

6. Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented
for each condition (Entire Subject Pool) ........... .........................49

7. Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings and STAI
Scores (Em optional Subjects) ..................... .............. ........... 50

8. Mean values and standard deviations for correct recognition of
peripheral and central items, presented for each condition
(Em otional Subjects).......................... ................ ........ ......51

9. Mean values and standard deviations for False Alarms and
Person-Centered Items, presented for each condition
(Em otional Subjects).......................... ................ .............. 53

10. Mean values and standard deviations for acceptance of suggested
peripheral, central, and personal items, presented for each
Misinformation condition (Emotional Subjects) ............................ 53









11. Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented
for each condition (Emotional Subjects)................... ..................... 54

12. Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings
(Reduced Subject Pool).............. ......... .......... ............. 56

13. Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central items,
presented for each condition (Reduced Subject Pool) ................... 57

14. Mean values and standard deviations for False Alarms and
Person-Centered Items, presented for each condition
(Reduced Subject Pool).............. ......... .......... ............. 58

15. Mean values for acceptance of suggested peripheral, central, and
personal items, presented for each Misinformation condition
(Reduced Subject Pool) ........................................... .............. .59

16. Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented
for each condition (Reduced Subject Pool).............. ................ 61
















LIST OF FIGURES

Figures page

1. Scene Number One................ .................. ...................... 35

2. Scene N um ber Tw o........................... ................. .............. 36

3. Scene N um ber Three ............. ....................... ......................... 37

4. Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central cues
(E entire Subject Pool).............................. ............ ...... ....... 46

5. Mean values for endorsement of misinformation items
(E entire Subject Pool).............................. ............ ...... ....... 48

6. Accuracy rate for selected True / False questions, split by
Vignette Type (Entire Subject Pool).............................................49

7. Mean values for correct recognition of items in each scene, by
Misinformation Condition and Emlevel (Emotional Subjects) ............. 52

8. Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central items,
split by Misinformation Condition (Reduced Subject Pool)................. 58

9. Mean values for suggested peripheral items later "recognized" by
subjects in the Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette
Type (Reduced Subject Pool) ............... .................... ............. 60

10. Mean values for suggested central items later "recognized" by
subjects in the Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette
Type (Reduced Subject Pool)................ ......... .......... ............. 60

11. Mean values for suggested person-centered items later "recognized" by
subjects in the Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette Type
(R educed Subject Pool) ............ .............. ............................. 61
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

THE IMPACT OF EMOTION ON MEMORY AND MISINFORMATION
ACCEPTANCE

By

Steven Kyle Knauts

December 2003


Chair: Russell Bauer, Ph.D.
Major Department: Department of Clinical and Health Psychology

In memory research, two concepts that have received increasing attention are

misinformation acceptance (believing you have seen or experienced something that was

in fact only suggested to you) and the effect of emotion on memory. The present study

was designed to investigate if there is any interaction between these two concepts. It was

hypothesized that subjects who view an emotional scene would be more likely to accept

misinformation suggested to them about the scene than subjects who viewed a neutral

scene. It was also hypothesized that subjects who view an emotional scene will have

better recognition for objects spatially close to the action, and poorer memory for objects

peripheral to the action, than subjects who view a neutral scene. The study determined

that subjects' memory for objects in the scene was generally the same, regardless of

whether they viewed an emotional or neutral scene. For subjects who received

misinformation about objects in the scene, a significant interaction suggested that subjects









who viewed an emotional scene were more likely to accept misinformation in some

situations, compared to subjects who viewed a neutral scene.
















CHAPTER 1
LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In thinking about memory, it would seem that most of us have something of a split

personality regarding its integrity. On the one hand we can acknowledge, and even find

amusing, the inherent fallibility of memory. On the other, memory is depicted as a

hidden storehouse of knowledge that holds the answers to any number of mysteries. Over

the years, the nature and quality of memory has been examined and challenged by

numerous experimenters attempting to answer basic questions about how we learn and

store information. The fact that some information may be forgotten or distorted has never

been surprising, or distressing. But in recent times the issue of accuracy in memory has

taken on vastly increased importance. The current controversy regarding "recovered"

memories has thrown psychologists, counselors, and experimenters into the center of a

frequently ugly battle played out before the media. On the one hand, therapists dealing

with memory of sexual abuse or other trauma risk have sometimes seen a patient

suddenly recollect an emotional event from the past and have steadfastly argued for the

reality of this phenomenon. However, in the absence of clear empirical support for this

reality, such practitioners have often been labeled as "quacks" that aid and abet an agenda

of blaming others for psychological problems. On the other hand, experimentalists who

suggest that recovered memories may be distorted or completely fabricated may be









accused of being in denial and, in one extreme, of being part of a conspiracy of child

abusers and satanists to cover up the truth [1]. Occupying a tenuous middle ground are

those who argue that whatever one believes about concepts like repression and the

possibility of recovered memory, the phenomenon of memory distortion is quite real. To

acknowledge that fact is not to denounce the reality of a person's experiences, but rather

to accept the challenge of determining what, if any, aspects of such memories have their

roots in actual experience, and to accept the possibility that what a person remembers

may only be an approximation of what actually occurred. In the world of forensics,

where lives can turn on a single remembrance, it becomes crucial to understand the

limitations of memory.

Early Memory Studies

The first systematic experimental study of memory began in 1885 with the

German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus. Before that time, researchers limited

themselves to obtaining anecdotal reports from subjects about their subjective

experiences in order to hypothesize about memory and other cognitive processes.

Ebbinghaus' use of nonsense syllables allowed him to control what the subject learned,

and consequently measure learning and memory through strict scientific method. These

early studies, by virtue of their method, reflect a certain philosophy about how memory is

encoded and stored in the brain. Words become "units" of memory, and as a

consequence the quality of memory was measured by how many "units" are recollected.

In later studies, it was discovered that the presentation of a word or concept in a person's

consciousness led to the activation, or "priming" of other, semantically related words or

concepts, making them more likely to be recalled [2]. This phenomenon was known as









"spreading activation," and suggested that rather than being discrete units of information,

words in memory were in fact associated with other words. In this general theory

memory becomes a web of complex interconnections, with semantically related words

associated with each other so as to provide a mechanism for the spreading activation

phenomenon. However, the word is still the basic unit in this memory machine.

Contextualism

The associational view of memory had an eloquent challenger in 1974 with James

Jenkins [3], who advocated a radically different viewpoint: that we remember contexts,

not details. Jenkins believed that while memory was frequently studied in the laboratory

as if it were an associational process, in reality it was more conceptual, based on

contextual relationships. Jenkins hypothesized that specific details are not stored in

memory, but that we learn overall contextual themes from which details can be later

reconstructed. Jenkins's hypothesis was vividly demonstrated in his accompanying study,

by which he had people learn various complex sentences, such as "The cat, running from

the barking dog, jumped on the table." Later on Jenkins presented more sentences to his

subjects and asked them if they had seen them before. He found that sentences that were

similar to the target sentences were just as likely to be called "old" in a recognition test as

were the target sentences themselves. Jenkins hypothesized that rather than remember the

sentence as a group of individual words, the subject would encode the gist of the

sentence. When presented with a similar sentence, the subject would not recognize that

certain words had been changed, deleted, or added. Rather, the subject would reconstruct

the content of the original sentence and determine if the new sentence had the same

content. If it did, the subject would then determine that he or she had seen it before.









Thus, Jenkins' argument was that memory was reconstructive rather than

reproductive. Each event had a quality as a whole, and it was this quality that was best

remembered, not the individual details. What made the contextual view really different

from a more associational view was the starring role given to the individual doing the

remembering. As Jenkins put it, contextualism "calls us back to considering what the

subject believes and knows when we talk of memory. It simultaneously suggests that we

look to the sources of this belief and to the subject's ways of constructing and

reconstructing his experience [3]." In other words, memory cannot always be counted on

to accurately reproduce reality, as any recollection is inevitably affected by the

individual's own perspective.

Schema Theory

While Jenkins did not use the term "schema," his discussion of contextualism was

consistent with the schematic view of memory. The schematic theory, as described by

Alba and Hasher [4], basically suggests that incoming information is encoded and stored

based in large part on prior knowledge structures. They enumerated four major

components of schema theory: selection, abstraction, interpretation, and integration.

Selection refers to the process by which certain information is encoded, and certain

information is not. According to the theory, whether or not a particular piece of

information is encoded depends on that information's relevance to a previously existing

schema that has been activated. The previous knowledge possessed by the individual

may take the form of theme knowledge, or of frame knowledge. Theme knowledge refers

to the phenomenon that the more an individual knows about a subject; the more easily

they will acquire new information about that same subject. This has been demonstrated






5


using subjects such as baseball and chess. The existence of a previous schema facilitates

the acquisition of new information that fits into the schema. Frame knowledge refers to

the phenomenon that incoming information whose structure matches previous

information will be more easily retained than knowledge whose structure does not match.

For example, people required to memorize a 7-digit string may find themselves

chunkingg" the numbers into a 3-digit string followed by a 4-digit string, thus giving the

overall string the structure of a telephone number. Because this structure has been used

so frequently in the past, its familiarity may facilitate recall of the string. Because what

information is selected is based in large part on previous knowledge, the theory postulates

that a person's objective recall of any given situation will by necessity be incomplete.

Abstraction is the next step in the encoding process. In this stage, information is encoded

with respect to its meaning, but not necessarily its format. Thus, while the overall

meaning of a sentence or paragraph may be retained, the precise wording and

grammatical structure will not.

Both selection and abstraction involve reducing the amount of information that is

to be remembered. In the interpretation stage, the subject makes inferences about the

incoming information. These inferences are used to make vague information clearer, fill

in missing detail, or simplify complex information. They can also lead to distorted

recollections. In an example cited by Alba and Hasher [4], subjects who are presented

with the sentence "The paratrooper leaped out the door," recall, "The paratrooper jumped

out of the plane." The subjects' inferences about the sentence led them to "recall" details

that were never actually presented. Integration occurs either when a new schema is

formed, or when an existing schema is modified. In either instance, the memory that is









created consists of incoming information that has been selected based on its perceived

relevance to prior knowledge, combined with inferences the subject has made about the

information. The bottom line for schema theory is that memory is not a verbatim record

of events, but rather an amalgam of past and present experience. Schema theory provides

an explanation for a variety of demonstrable memory distortions. Strohmer et al. [5]

demonstrated just such a phenomenon when examining how counselors' previous

hypotheses about clients affected their memory. They presented the counselors with

narratives from these clients, then later tested recall for the narratives. The counselors

tended to remember information that confirmed their previous hypotheses, rather than

information that disconfirmed their hypotheses. This effect occurred even though the

narratives contained more disconfirmatory than confirmatory information. Schema

theory would explain such a distortion by suggesting that the counselors, while reading

the narratives, filtered the new information through their preconceived notions and so

gave more emphasis to the confirmatory information, resulting in better encoding and

consequently better recall for such information.

While schema theory accounts for some examples of memory distortion, an

alternative body of research examined by Alba and Hasher suggests that some central

tenets of schema theory are not correct. A major component of schema theory is that the

amount of information taken in by a subject is drastically reduced through the processes

of selection and abstraction. However, Alba and Hasher conclude that in reality, memory

for complex events is in fact quite rich and detailed, which schematic theory does not

allow for. Schema theory is useful in explaining memory functions in the laboratory, but

has a more difficult time accounting for memory as it occurs in everyday life. Like









Jenkins' contextualist theory, schematic theories of memory make the individual the

primary determinant in how new experiences are encoded and recollected. However,

Alba and Hasher complain that most schematic theories are constructed with the specific

aim of explaining certain kinds of memory distortions and so fail to adequately explain

how memory, on most occasions, can be quite accurate even for very complex events.

Given this, schema theory operates better as an explanation for specific types of errors

than as a more global theory of memory.

MEM Theory

Marcia Johnson's MEM theory also attempts to explain various kinds of memory

errors, while at the same time do justice to the complexity and richness of memory [6].

MEM, which stands for Multiple-Entry Modular Memory, holds that when an individual

encodes a new memory he or she encodes a host of varying kinds of information. In

addition to the semantic content of the event, the individual encodes perceptual details,

such as sights, smells, and sounds. The individual also encodes "contextual" information,

defined by Johnson as a sense of when in time the event happened. Contextual

information could include a link to what immediately preceded the memory in addition to

what followed it, as well as remembering what day the event happened and when during

the day (or night) it occurred. Finally, the individual encodes "cognitive operations," or a

sense of the elaborative and reconstructive processes that took place during the formation

of the memory. According to Johnson, it is the qualitative differences between these

memory traces that allow an individual to determine where, when, and how they learned a

specific bit of information. This "source monitoring" is potentially important, as it could

allow a person to evaluate the quality of information. For example, learning a piece of









information from the National Enquirer as opposed to The New York Times could have

significant impact on how seriously the information is considered. One example of a

failure of source monitoring is the "false fame" phenomenon. Jacoby, Kelley, Brown,

and Jasechko [7] had subjects read a list of names that were not famous. Later, they had

those subjects read a new list and decide whether each name was famous or not. The new

list contained famous and non-famous names, including several of the non-famous names

the subjects read before. The subjects were more likely to judge the previously viewed

non-famous names as famous than the new non-famous names. Jacoby et al.

hypothesized that subjects presented with a previously viewed name may recognize it as

familiar without remembering where they heard it. They may then decide that the name's

familiarity is due to it being famous and so respond accordingly.

Source monitoring may fail for a number of reasons. According to Johnson,

Hashtroudi, and Lindsay [8], source determinations depend on detecting qualitative

differences in the memory of events; anything that prevents the individual from creating a

fully formed "event," such as stress or divided attention, will reduce the amount of

contextual information encoded and diminish the event's uniqueness and subsequent

discriminability. In addition, if two events are semantically similar to each other there is

potential for source confusion. For example, a person may remember hearing a certain

joke at one party when in fact it was told at another party held a week earlier at the same

house. Were the parties held at two different houses they would become more dissimilar

from each other and thus more distinguishable.

In contrast, Jacoby, Kelley, Brown, and Jasechko [7] argued that recollecting an

event or piece of information did not automatically give the individual a sense of where









they learned it. In other words, a piece of information was not intrinsically tied to

knowledge of where that information was learned. Jacoby et al. hypothesized that source

recollections involved a different retrieval process altogether. When they repeated their

experiment and asked subjects to additionally report whether or not they had seen each

name on a previous list, subjects became better at discriminating famous names from

previously presented non-famous names. Jacoby et al. interpreted the results to indicate

that since subjects were specifically asked to make a source judgment, they became more

aware of the possibility that a name might be familiar because they had just seen it before.

One particular form of source monitoring is what Johnson and Raye [6] termed

reality monitoring. Reality monitoring refers to the ability to determine whether a

particular memory was originally generated externally (as a perceptual event) or internally

(as a product of imagination or dreams). Johnson and Raye determined that perceived

and imagined events are qualitatively different from each other, and it is this qualitative

difference that allows individuals to determine where the memory came from. Perceived

memories, they wrote, contained more perceptual detail than did imagined events.

Perceived events also contained richer contextual information, such as when the event

happened, what happened before, and what happened afterwards. Imagined events, on

the other hand, contained more cognitive operations that served almost like a log of the

memory's formation. Johnson, Hashtroudi, and Lindsay [8] suggested that recognition of

cognitive operations could be used to identify the individual as the source of the memory.

Schooler, Gerhard, & Loftus [9] used descriptions of memories generated by

subjects from a previous experiment and asked independent judges to classify the

memories as being from actual events or as being products of imagination. When the









judges were given hints as to the kind of qualitative differences that exist between real

and imagined memories, they became quite good at discriminating real from perceived

events. However, their ability to discriminate deteriorated when they were not aware of

such differences. In another study, Dodson and Johnson [10] had subjects look at

photographs and read descriptive paragraphs of locations and situations. They found that

many subjects falsely remembered seeing pictures that they had, in fact, only read about.

This could be construed as another example of a failure of reality monitoring; the subjects

who read the descriptive paragraphs may have visualized them, and then confused their

own visualization with an actual perception. However, when the subjects were asked

about the stimuli in a way that encouraged them to consider the source of their

recollection, they produced fewer false attributions. These results are consistent with

Jacoby, Kelley, Brown, and Jasechko's [7] hypothesis that source monitoring (in this

case, monitoring where the event was externally or internally generated) is not always a

spontaneous occurrence, and sometimes must be explicitly prompted.

Misinformation Acceptance

One potential effect of a difficulty to discriminate between potential sources of

information is what Loftus and Hoffman [11] dubbed "misinformation acceptance." This

phenomenon occurs when an individual, after observing some event, is given new

information about a particular part of the event that is either inconsistent with what

actually occurred or is a detail that was not actually observed by the individual. The

individual may then recall this misinformation as if it were a memory of the observed

event. An example of misinformation acceptance used by Loftus and Hoffman was of a

man who witnessed a robbery in which the thief took a hammer. After the event another









witness told him that the thief stole a screwdriver; when he is interviewed by police and

they asked him if the thief took a hammer or screwdriver, he tells them it was a

screwdriver.

One possibility would be that the man did not actually see the thief take the

hammer. In this instance the man would have created a new memory based on the other

eyewitness's statement, perhaps by visualizing the thief taking a screwdriver, and then

included it in his own memory of the event. If this were true, it would be an example of a

failure of reality monitoring, misattributing an internally generated memory (the man's

visualization of the other person's statement) as being a perceived memory. Johnson,

Hashtroudi, and Linday [8] indicate that confusion about the source of memories

(whether internal-external or external-external) increases when there is a high degree of

perceptual similarity between the two sources. In the robbery example, the man's

visualization of the other eyewitness's account would likely be extremely similar to his

own perceived experience, and consequently easier to incorporate into his own

experience.

Another possible scenario for the above account would be that the man did in fact

see the thief take the hammer, but accepted the other person's account anyway. There is

some controversy about the meaning of this type of error. One possibility would be that

the man accepted the new statement as accurate and so reported it as his own memory

even though he was well aware he did not see such a thing. This is also a potential

explanation for the previous example where the man did not see the thief take anything,

and is a problem of demand characteristics. The man wishes to be accurate, and so

consciously misrepresents his own memory to be cooperative, or to avoid seeming stupid.









To see if misled subjects genuinely believe they have seen events presented as

misinformation, Zaragoza and Lane [12] presented a slide sequence, then asked the

subjects to take a memory test that incorporated misinformation about the slides. For

example, a question would ask "When the man looked at his wristwatch before opening

the door, did he appear anxious?" In fact, the man in the slide sequence was not wearing

a wristwatch. After this test, subjects then took a recognition test for a series of items,

including the wristwatch. A subject responding that he or she remembered a wristwatch

could then be said to have accepted the misinformation. In the experiment, the subjects

frequently accepted the misinformation as being true. Then, Zaragoza and Lane asked the

subjects to make a source judgment, asking if certain information was seen (in the slide

sequence), read about (in the questions), or both. A significant number of subjects

indicated both seeing and reading about the misinformation, suggesting that they did

indeed have a false memory. Note that this effect did not require the subjects to "forget"

that they had read the misinformation, as they accurately reported reading about it.

Consequently, the results do not seem to be the result of shifting the attribution from one

source (the test) to another (the slide sequence). Rather, it would seem that the subjects

were able to generate a visual image from the misinformation that was then incorporated

into memory for the slides, but this process did not eliminate subjects' ability to

acknowledge that they had read about it. In another effort to circumvent potential

demand characteristics, Zaragoza and Lane told the subjects before the recognition test

that some things they read about in the test they just took were not correct. They

discovered that the warning made no difference; subjects who received it were just as









likely to accept the misinformation as subjects who received no warning. This again

suggested that the subjects genuinely believed seeing items that they in fact did not see.

A second explanation for misinformation acceptance despite encoding the original

event is that when misinformation is given, the original memory trace is present but

inhibited from being recalled [13]. By this view, the misinformation is retrieved in place

of the original memory. A third possibility is that the original memory was itself altered

to incorporate the misinformation. Donders, Schooler, and Loftus [14] used a robbery

sequence in an experimental setting, during which the thief can be seen taking a hammer.

Some subjects were then misled that the thief had in fact taken a screwdriver. When

presented with a forced-choice test ("Did you see a hammer or a screwdriver?"), a

significant number of subjects chose screwdriver. In addition, those misled subjects who

chose the screwdriver answered significantly faster than those who chose the hammer,

suggesting a higher degree of confidence in their answer.

In examining the results of the Donders study, one possibility is that the subjects

who were misled now had two sources of memory, the actual event and the

misinformation. Perhaps those who eventually chose the correct answer of hammer did

so because they recognized a discrepancy between what they had seen and what they were

then told. But recognizing that there was a discrepancy and making a judgment about

what they had actually seen made them take longer to answer than those who accepted the

misinformation. By contrast, the control subjects who were not misled and chose the

correct answer were faster in responding both in comparison to the control subjects who

responded incorrectly and the misled subjects who responded correctly. The Donders

study still does not resolve the issue of what happens to the original memory trace. It









does, however, show that misinformation can be accepted in the face of previous

perceptions, and accepted with confidence.

Hypnosis and the Effect of Suggestion

In the Donders et al. [14] study, subjects who ended up accepting the

misinformation answered significantly faster that subjects who ended up rejecting the

misinformation. This could be because subjects who took longer to make a response

analyzed the new information with a more critical eye, and made them more likely to

reject the misinformation. By contrast, subjects who did accept the misinformation did

not take long to make a decision, suggesting the possibility that they did not examine the

new information very critically. These results could be interpreted to suggest that the

more uncritically new information is accepted, the more likely it will be incorporated into

the pre-existing memory and later recalled as being something the individual saw with his

or her own eyes. Information examined with a critical eye towards where it came from

and how it compares to memory of genuinely perceived events is less likely to be so

incorporated. In forensics, hypnosis has been a technique used to aid eyewitnesses in

recalling what they saw. A survey conducted by Yapko [15] demonstrated that a great

many mental health professionals believe hypnosis has an enhancing effect on memory.

Given the fact that hypnosis induces an altered state of consciousness, however, how

resistant are individuals under hypnosis to possible misinformation? How critically can

they examine new information?

A study performed by Sheehan, Grigg, and McCann [16] subjected 92 volunteers

to a slide series that showed a man surreptitiously stealing a wallet from a woman. The

subjects were then either placed under hypnosis or instructed to simulate being under









hypnosis. A new investigator, blind to the condition the subjects were in, then came in

and asked a series of open-ended questions designed to plant misinformation (for

example, suggesting during the course of the question that the robber had the name

"Nixon" written on his jacket when in fact he did not). After the subjects were brought

out of hypnosis (or pretended to come out), they were administered a forced-choice

recognition test that included the false items planted in the hypnosis/simulation condition.

While both groups ended up incorporating the misleading information into their

recognition responses, the hypnosis group did so more frequently. In addition, the

hypnosis group intruded more objects and actions into their free-recall accounts that were

not actually present or did not occur. Sheehan et al. interpret these results to mean that

hypnosis lowers the degree to which an individual scrutinizes a piece of information for

accuracy. Such an individual is more likely to accept information uncritically as accurate,

and consequently incorporate it into his or her memory.

The potential mechanism for such an action was labeled "absorption" by Tellegen

[17], who defined it as intense concentration on a central experience at the expense of

contextual orientation. In other words, because the individual keeps all of his or her

attention on the central experience (i.e., listening to the hypnotist), new information being

introduced lacks the kind of perceptual and contextual specificity that allows the subject

to identify it as such. Consequently, the ability of a person to engage in source or reality

monitoring may be seriously impaired by the hypnotic state. Even a basic source memory

can be lost, such as in hypnotic source amnesia [18], where an individual under hypnosis

mistakes an external instruction as coming from him or herself. The implications for

testimony "refreshed" by hypnosis, or of memories elicited through hypnotic suggestion,









are obvious. Any question that contained even the smallest bit of information could

potentially develop into a full-fledged memory, a memory that the subject would be

impaired in evaluating as to its veracity.

Reality Monitoring and Repressed Memory Syndrome

The controversy surrounding hypnosis and its possible effects on memory has not

stopped it from being used as a technique in memory recovery. Therapists may use

hypnosis and make suggestions to their patients that conceivably could be interpreted by

the patients as originating in their own thoughts or recollections. But is it really plausible

that a person could accept a wholly fabricated impression as being a genuine memory?

One interesting additional finding related to the qualitative differences between perceived

and imagined events was reported by Johnson, Foley, Suengas, and Raye [19] in their

study of autobiographical memory. They asked subjects to generate memories of old and

new perceived events, as well as old and new imagined events. For example, a subject

would be asked to recall a trip to the dentist as a perceived event. They would also be

asked to remember something that they always wanted to do but never did, as an

imagined event. Johnson et al. [19] found that the older perceived memories tended to

have less perceptual detail than the newer perceived memories. These old memories also

had fewer contextual underpinnings, such as where the subject was, what time of day it

was, and what happened just before and after the main event. One possible explanation

for these differences would be that as memories age, they lose some of their perceptual

richness. In addition, the sense of how the memory fits into the larger context of the

person's life fades away, leaving the memory isolated from what happened before and

after the event in question. The end result may be that as perceived memories age, they









approach imagined memories in how they "seem" qualitatively, with relatively few

perceptual details and contextual links.

Why, then, is this important? Such a view is important because it makes the

phenomenon of false memory syndrome more understandable, and more amenable to

scientific study. There is an almost stereotypical scenario surrounding the recovery of

repressed memories. An individual enters therapy for some problem, and becomes

convinced, either through popular literature or through the therapist, that his or her real

problem stems from abuse that occurred in childhood but is now repressed. The

individual works to "recover" memories of this abuse, perhaps through hypnosis or

another technique like guided imagery. Once an individual accepts that there is at least

the possibility that they could have been abused, however, they may accept their imagery

as memory. From a qualitative standpoint, what they have imagined could seem quite

similar to other, genuine memories of childhood.

An easy riposte to such a speculation is that the emotional component has been

left out. Individuals would not be able to fabricate memories that contained genuine

emotional content. Loftus [20], however, was able to demonstrate that individuals could

be led to believe in fabricated events that contained at least a moderately traumatic

impact. She approached relatives of a number of people and asked them to bring up a

memory of when the subjects got lost in a shopping mall an event that never actually

occurred. While most of the people reacted with confusion when first hearing of the

event, they eventually came to believe it actually happened, to the extent that some

spontaneously filled in details of the situation that their relatives never mentioned.

Nearly all remembered it as an upsetting experience. Loftus was able to show, in an









admittedly anecdotal way, that it was possible to create memories with genuine emotional

content when encouraged by a person the subjects knew well and trusted, a situation not

unlike the therapy experience. Of course, ethical considerations prevented her from

attempting to create the kind of traumatic memories and emotions that would arise from

being physically or sexually abused.

"Pretend You Didn't Hear That" Directed Forgetting

In discussing memory distortion, another phenomenon worthy of mention is the

"Directed Forgetting" effect. A typical paradigm [21] is when subjects are given a list of

words to remember. The experimental group is then told that the list they just

remembered was merely practice, and that they should forget it. They are then given a

second list of words to remember. The control group is given the second list without the

instructions to forget the first. Both groups are then instructed to recall all the words that

they can. The experimental group is specifically cued to recall words they were

previously told to forget, lest the subjects simply choose not to recall words from the first

list as a demand characteristic of the experiment. The directed forgetting effect is found

when the experimental group recalls fewer words from the first list than the control

group.

Several theories have been put forth to explain directed forgetting, including

differential encoding, differential storage, and selective rehearsal [22]. Whetstone, Cross,

and Whetstone [23] suggested that the directed forgetting effect is due to initiation of an

unconscious process that determines what will later enter consciousness. In a study

utilizing event-related brain potentials, Ullsperger, Meckilnger, and Muller [22] noted

that in a recognition task conducted after the initial words were presented, the









presentation of to-be-remembered words evoked potentials in both the frontal and parietal

lobes, while presentation of to-be-forgotten words evoked potentials in only the frontal

lobe. In contrast, a different experiment designed to prompt differential encoding (the

subjects were instructed to process words either shallowly or deeply) showed both frontal

and parietal ERPs. The investigators reported that the results suggested that directed

forgetting involved active inhibition of the to-be-forgotten words.

The notion of a process that controls forgetting runs contrary to previously

accepted theory, in that forgetting is due merely to an absence of active encoding

strategies, or insufficient attention being allocated. In the case of such phenomena as

repressed memory, the idea is compelling, and begs the question of whether "repressed"

memory is in fact due to the person telling himself or herself to forget what happened to

them. It is important to point out that directed forgetting does not appear to wipe the

memory clean. When subjects are given recognition, as opposed to recall tasks, the

directed forgetting effect disappears [21]. This effect may be analogous to anecdotal

stories told by individuals who claim to suffer from repressed memory, and who indicate

that they had no recollection of their abuse until some particular smell, sound, or visual

cue triggered their recall. The directed forgetting effect is further evidence that human

beings are not passive recorders of information, and that many different processes may

occur to alter, inhibit, or enhance memory.

Stealing History: The Story of Binjamin Wilkomirski

My earliest memories are a rubble field of isolated images and events. Shards of
memory with hard knife-sharp edges, which still cut flesh if touched today.
Mostly a chaotic jumble, with very little chronological fit; shards that keep
surfacing against the orderly grain of grown-up life and escaping the laws of logic.









If I'm going to write about it, I have to give up on the ordering logic of grown-
ups; it would only distort what happened... I can only use words to draw as exactly
as possible what happened, what I saw; exactly the way my child's memory has
held on to it; with no benefit of perspective or vanishing point. [24]

Perhaps the most puzzling and compelling single case of memory distortion is the

case of Binjamin Wilkomirski. In 1995, Wilkomirski published a book called Fragments,

which he indicated was an account of his experiences as a young child who grew up in

Riga, Latvia, and survived stays in 2 concentration camps during the Holocaust. He was

eventually smuggled into Switzerland, where he was raised by the Doesekkers, a doctor

and his wife. Fragments proved to be an international sensation, and was eventually

translated into 9 languages. Wilkomirski himself became a figure of some note, and

traveled to various countries lecturing about his book and meeting fellow Holocaust

survivors. During one such visit to the United States, he met a woman by the name of

Laura Grabowski, who was herself a Holocaust survivor. While Grabowski did not

immediately recognize him, Wilkomirski remembered Grabowski as another child he

knew at the Birkinau concentration camp, and showed her a picture from a Krakow

orphanage where they were both pictured. During a concert on National Holocaust

Remembrance Day in 1998, Wilkomirski told the audience about the first time he saw

Grabowski at Birkinau:

I saw that someone was brought back to the barrack, I was sitting in the mud, and
then I thought I was the last of the children. And then I was very happy when I
saw that the door of our barrack opened and two girls of our group came out
holding hands. And I looked at them and that's why I kept it in my memory. I
was very much astonished, I thought: Why had one girl's hair turned white? The
other girl was normal blond. [25]









During this same concert, Wilkomirski and Grabowski played a duet on the piano, which

was filmed by the BBC for a television special. It was a very dramatic and affecting

scene.

And, as it turns out, nearly all of it was false. Wilkomirski's fame took an

unexpected turn in 1998, when journalist named Daniel Ganzfried published a story

challenging his identity as a Holocaust survivor [25]. He indicated that Wilkomirski was

actually Bruno Grosjean, born in Switzerland in 1941, and eventually adopted by a

childless couple in 1945. He was not a Jew from Riga, and in fact had never left neutral

Switzerland during the Second World War. And Laura Grabowksi? It was later

discovered that she was actually a woman by the name of Laurel Rose Willson, born in

Tacoma, Washington in 1941. Her major claim to fame, before her association with

Wilkomirski, was her publication (as Lauren Stratford) of a book called Satan's

Underground, where she claimed to be a victim of satanic ritual abuse [25].

If Wilkomirski were simply a fraud, Fragments would go on the list of notable

literary hoaxes, alongside the Hitler diaries. What makes his case so unusual, is that he

genuinely seems to believe that he was there. Despite the charges against him, back up

by ample government documents showing Grosjean's birth to a single mother, his

numerous foster placements, and his eventual adoption by the Doesekker family,

Wilkomirski has continued to insist that he is a Holocaust survivor. Wilkomirksi's case

demonstrates just how far memory distortion can extend, to where an individual has been

able to craft an entirely fictional history for himself.









Flashbulb Memories

The phenomenon of false repressed memory, and of cases like that of Binjamin

Wilkomirski, suggests that it is possible to fabricate memories of very traumatic events

and believe them to be real. What, then, about genuine emotional or traumatic events that

are experienced? Are they encoded differently than "everyday" memories? From an

intuitive point of view, it would seem that emotional events tend to stand out in our lives,

particularly more than mundane, day-to-day events. Perhaps, then, emotion has an

enhancing effect on memory, giving emotionally laden memories vividness than causes

them to stand out. One of the defining events for the United States occurred on

November 22, 1963, when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas. It was a

moment that seemed to sear itself into the nation's consciousness. For years afterward,

people would be able to tell you, in great detail, where they were and what they were

doing when they first heard that Kennedy had been shot. Brown and Kulick [26], writing

about this and other similar phenomena, theorized that a special mechanism triggered by

the extreme emotionality of the event essentially froze the moment in time. They dubbed

such memories "flashbulb" memories, because they appeared to have the clarity of a

photograph.

Memory researchers were eager to put Brown and Kulick's theory to the test.

With each new national trauma, it seemed, came investigators canvassing college

campuses and other places to record individuals' recollections of their personal situation

when they heard of the event. Then the investigators could contact the subjects months

down the road and ask them to recount their stories again, comparing them to the old

recollections to test for accuracy. When President Reagan was shot by John Hinckley in









1981, Pillemer [27] interviewed subjects one month, and then seven months, after the

event. He found that personal recollections were richly detailed and quite consistent

between the two time periods. He also found that people who responded with stronger

initial emotions had more elaborate and more consistent memories. Pillemer's results

would seem to bear out Brown and Kulick's theory. However, his interpretations are

weakened somewhat by the fact that he first interviewed his subjects a month after the

event. Their recollections could have been influenced by talking to others about the event

over that time frame. The closer the first interview to the event itself, the more accurate

the initial memory will be, allowing for a better idea of how stable such memories remain

over time.

Neisser and Harsch [28] were able to interview subjects the day after the space

shuttle Challenger exploded on live national television as it lifted off from the Florida

peninsula in January, 1986. They then waited for 2 1/2 years before interviewing their

subjects again. What they found was that about a third of the 44 students had

recollections that were in fact very inconsistent with their initial recollections, while not

one had a recollection entirely consistent. In addition, the students were frequently very

surprised when confronted with their initial recollections; their memories seemed so

vivid. Neisser, who first wrote a critique of the "flashbulb" theory in 1982, used this

study to suggest that the phenomenon was more mythical than real.

A somewhat less harsh response to Brown and Kulick was by Christianson [29], a

Swedish psychologist. He interviewed 40 subjects 6 weeks and again one year after the

Swedish Prime Minister, Olaf Palme, was assassinated. Christianson found that the

initial recollections contained a high level of detail concerning the individuals' personal









circumstances surrounding their first hearing of the event, suggesting to Christianson that

the memories were good examples of "flashbulb" memories. However, the memories

recalled a year later contained significantly fewer details, suggesting a certain amount of

forgetting over that time period.

According to Christianson [29], the study suggested that like most memories,

flashbulb memories consisted of recall of the gist, or central aspects of the event,

followed by reconstruction of specific details. It is possible that since the gist is recalled

with particular vividness, any reconstruction done around the core takes on that same

feeling of clarity, leading to the sometimes wildly inaccurate recollections found by

Neisser and Harsch that nevertheless seem so real. Take, for example, the following

account from their 1992 study:

When I first heard about the explosion I was sitting in my freshman dorm room
with my roommate and we were watching TV. It came on a news flash and we
were both totally shocked. I was really upset and I went upstairs to talk to a
friend of mine and then I called my parents [28]

This recollection, taken two and a half years after the Challenger explosion, seems very

vivid. The student's initial recollection, however, had her first hearing the news in class,

then going home and getting the details from television -- presumably alone, since no

roommate was mentioned in the first account, nor was there a call to her parents

mentioned. What happened to the memory? Christianson [29] hypothesized that

reconstructions, in the absence of specific recalled details, will be based on what is

"typical" for the individual. For example, the above student, remembering clearly that

she first heard the news in the morning, may have inferred that she received it through a

typical morning activity -- watching TV with her roommate. Another possibility could be









that the student heard so many people talk about seeing the explosion on television that

she adopted their stories as her own, a failure of source monitoring. These naturalistic

studies of memory are certainly fascinating, but in the absence of more specific

information about what individuals actually encode and why, all we can do is speculate

about how emotion actually influences memory. What, then, do more controlled

experiments tell us?

Emotion in the Laboratory

Experimenters have done studies that expose subjects to emotionally laden

stimuli, with the aim of seeing how such stimuli are encoded and remembered. Loftus

and Christianson [30] conducted a study by which subjects were shown a series of 15

slides. Each slide depicted some everyday scene (a kitchen, a sidewalk, etc.). Each slide

had some central feature placed clearly in the foreground, and a peripheral feature placed

in the background. The critical slide was number 8, which depicted a woman with a

bicycle. This slide was varied for 3 different groups. To elicit an emotional response,

one version had the woman lying beside a bicycle, bleeding from the head. Another,

neutral version simply showed the woman riding the bicycle, which was shown to the

control group. A third variation showed the woman carrying the bicycle over her head.

This variation was presented to a third group in order to determine what effect surprising

or unusual events had on memory.

After the subjects viewed the slides, they were shown another series of slides that

were identical to the original slides except that the central and peripheral features had

been removed. They were then asked to indicate what features had been removed and

describe them, including perceptual features (e.g., the color of a coat). Finally, subjects









were given a recognition test where they were presented with four versions of a given

slide and asked to pick which one they had previously seen. The results indicated that,

compared to the control group, the emotion group had better memory for central details,

but impaired memory for peripheral details. By contrast, the group shown the unusual

slide demonstrated impaired memory for both central and peripheral details. These

results suggest that, aside from the novelty of the item, there was something about the

emotional nature of the "accident" slide that improved memory for the central details.

In order to determine the nature of this effect, Loftus and Christianson exposed

another set of groups to the slides and asked them to write down what they first thought

about when viewing each slide. Qualitative analysis of the responses indicated that the

emotional group tended to be more specific about the central figure (by referring to her

gender more frequently), and made frequent reference to the central action. They were

also more likely to report some affect. By contrast, the neutral group was more likely to

contain descriptions of the surrounding environment. The unusual group was like the

emotion group in that it made fewer comments about the surrounding environment, but

unlike the emotion group in that their productions contained fewer affective comments.

In comparing the comments made by the subjects to the previous experiment, it

would seem that the differing content of the critical slides contributed to a differential

focus of attention on central vs. peripheral details. The emotion group appeared to focus

in on the central figure, while the neutral group apparently shifted between the figure and

the figure's surroundings (Loftus and Christianson admit that in the absence of a

tachistoscope or other method to track the persons' movements, there is no way to be sure

of this). This is consistent with the results showing better memory for central details but









impaired memory for peripheral details when the slide contains emotional content. While

the unusual group also appeared to focus in on the central figure, their lack of an affective

response may have contributed to a degraded encoding of memory. Loftus and

Christianson theorized that one possibility for the unusual group's results could be that

they were focused in on some aspect of the slide not tested.

Another, similar study of the effect of emotional content on memory processing

was conducted by Burke, Heuer, and Reisberg [31]. In this study, there were two basic

sets of slides produced that showed a mother taking her son to visit his father at work (a

spoken narrative accompanied the slide presentation). One set showed the mother taking

her son to a garage, where he watched his father work on a car. Another set, the

emotional set, showed the mother taking the son to a hospital, where he watched his

father perform a graphic surgical procedure. There were a total of 12 slides per group,

with the first set and last set (taking the son to, then away the place of work) being

identical between groups. Burke et al. tested the emotional impact of the slides by

monitoring heart rate, and showed that the group shown the surgery slides demonstrated

more physiological arousal than the group shown the garage slides. Interestingly enough,

the researches found that the heart rate of subjects viewing the surgery slides actually

slowed. While this might seem to be counterintuitive, Burke et al. note that previous

research has shown that cardiac deceleration has been associated with increased cortical

arousal [31]. In testing memory, they divided the content of the slides into four

categories: gist (the main thrust of the story), basic-level visual information (a brief

description of the slide in question), central details (plot-irrelevant details spatially near a









central figure or action) and peripheral details (plot-irrelevant details spatially removed

from a central figure or action).

The subjects were given multiple-choice questions for each type of memory

content one week after the initial viewing. The results indicated better memory for gist

and basic-level visual information across the slide series in subjects who viewed the

surgery slides. For central details, those slides that specifically held the arousing stimuli

(the surgery) demonstrated a marked enhancement of memory. By contrast, memory for

peripheral details in the slides containing emotional content was impaired. These results

are consistent with those of Loftus and Christianson [30]. These studies suggest that

emotionally arousing stimuli lead to a narrowing of attention on the central aspect of

those stimuli, at the expense of peripheral information. One notable example of such a

phenomenon occurring in everyday life is the phenomenon of "gun focus," explained by

Loftus [32] as the tendency of victims of muggings or holdups to focus inordinately on

the weapon being trained on them. The result is a highly detailed description of the

weapon itself, with only a vague sense of the person who happened to be holding it. The

narrowing of attention has been demonstrated in animal studies as well. Wurtz,

Goldberg, and Robinson [33] demonstrated by using a tachistoscope that monkeys

presented with a neutral monkey face will train their eyes all around the face. However,

when presented with a "threat" face (eyes and mouth wide open), the monkeys will focus

in on the eyes and mouth, failing to take in the entire face as before.

The previous studies have strongly suggested that a narrowing of attention on

central details occurs during emotional events. A natural conclusion would be that the

enhanced memory for central details is due to the additional attentional resources devoted









to the central aspects of the stimulus at the encoding stage. However, studies of memory

that manipulate brain chemistry have demonstrated that modulating affect after learning

has already occurred still affects memory. For example, the adrenal medullary hormone

epinephrine is commonly released during stressful experiences. Experiments in which

epinephrine was administered to rats after passive-avoidance training demonstrated

improved retention for the training [34]. Looking at the other side of the issue, McGaugh

[35] administered propranolol (a beta-adrenergic antagonist) to human subjects prior to

their watching a slide series similar to the one used by Burke, Heuer, and Reisberg [31].

The medicated group did not show the emotion-enhancing effects normally seen upon

viewing the emotional slides. Of course, since the propranolol was administered prior to

viewing the slides, the lack of an effect for emotional content could be due to loss of the

attentional narrowing effect.

Hypotheses

The narrowing effect that emotional content can have on an individual's attention

raises the question of what occurs when individuals are asked to reconstruct emotional

events. Will they be able to discern that they did not really pay much attention to

peripheral details? Will they be more susceptible to accepting misinformation, as in

hypnosis? Will they be more likely to make errors of source or reality monitoring? The

current study was designed to answer these questions. The study showed subjects a

videotaped vignette of a man and a woman having a discussion. One group was shown a

vignette with low emotional content that has the couple discussing neutral (non-

emotional) issues for a set amount of time in several rooms of a house. A second group

was shown an emotional vignette that was perceptually similar to the neutral scene,









except that the couple was arguing about a more emotional, personal topic. Halfway

through the scene, the man suddenly appeared to slap the woman. There were many

details to see in the house; some were peripheral to the action, (i.e., spatially removed

from the central characters) and some were central to the action (e.g., spatially close to

the center of the scene). There were also details directly associated with the persons in

the vignettes (i.e., clothing and jewelry).

After the subjects viewed the various scenes, they were given a written test of

memory for the scene. Based on the method used by Zaragoza and Lane [12], some

subjects took a test that asked questions about the scene in such a way that suggested the

existence of certain items that were not actually seen. Other subjects took a similar test

that did not include misinformation. After this test, the subjects were given a recognition

test for a variety of items. Some of these items were present in the scene, and some were

not. There were also items that were suggested to be present by the interposed test (that

is, the test that was given to those subjects in the misinformation conditions). Subjects in

the misinformation conditions who responded positively to an item suggested were

considered to have accepted the misinformation.

Based on previous research, the following hypotheses were made:

In the condition without misinformation, subjects who view an emotional scene

will have enhanced memory for central details and impaired memory for

peripheral details compared to subjects who view a neutral scene.

In the condition with misinformation, subjects who view an emotional scene will

be more likely to accept misinformation related to peripheral items, and less likely









to accept misinformation related to central items, compared to subjects who view

a neutral scene.

Capturing "Emotional Memory" An Unbreakable Conundrum?

Before continuing on to the procedure section, it is worthwhile to consider a

methodological issue that is peculiar to this field of study. To measure the effect of

emotion on memory, the researcher makes 2 key assumptions: that his or her method will

be successful in evoking an emotional response, and that any change between the control

group and the experimental group is the result of that emotion. The first assumption can

be checked in any number of ways: by self-report, measuring heart rate, or other

physiological signs of arousal (again, assuming that an emotional response will produce

such changes in the sympathetic nervous system). The researcher should be able to

determine that at the very least, an emotional reaction has been produced.

The second assumption, that it is the emotional response that produces the change

in recall or recognition, is more problematic. In order to provoke the emotional response

to begin with, changes must necessarily be made to the stimuli that will be used. If one is

presenting a stimulus that is designed to provoke an emotional response in the subject,

that stimulus must be of a qualitatively different nature than a stimulus that is not

intended to provoke such a response. For example, a researcher wishing to provoke an

emotional response as part of the experimental method may do so by showing the subject

a picture of a dead kitten. The researcher might wish to show a photograph to the control

subject as well. Assuming the researcher does not want to provoke an emotional

response in the control group, he or she most likely would not show the same photo. By

making such changes in stimuli between the control and experimental groups, a confound









is thus introduced into the system. After all, the true variable is not the different

photographs, but rather the different emotional response (or lack thereof) that the photos

produce.

When changes are indeed seen in memory, the researcher is thus faced with the

question of what really caused the change. Was it the different emotional state the

subjects experienced? Or was it the differences between the physical stimuli themselves?

If the researcher is studying the effect of emotion on memory, he or she would

undoubtedly prefer to believe that it was the emotional component that produced the

change. The difference between the stimuli themselves, however, can never be

completely discounted. Burke, Heuer, & Reisberg [31] considered that one solution

would be using the same stimuli for the control and emotional groups, and then

manipulating arousal through some external means. One could, for example, have one

group of subjects watch the stimuli while sitting next to a fearful object. Burke et al [31]

argued, however, that there is reason to believe that a qualitative difference exists

between remembering an emotional event, and remembering a neutral event while

emotional. In other words, the researcher may have solved the methodological problem,

but in the process has failed to capture the very process that is of interest.

Burke et al [31] discussed one alternative that was presented in an unpublished

thesis by K. Andrews [36]. Andrews tested memory for emotional and neutral scenes

from a number of successful movies that had been viewed 6 months previously. He also

asked subjects to rate how "arousable" they were, by rating such things as how long they

stay angry after a fight. Andrews found that the subjects who rated themselves as being

more arousable had a memory advantage for emotional scenes from the selected films.









This result suggested that subjects who had a greater emotional reaction to such scenes

had improved memory for them. Burke et al [31] concluded that although the confound

of differences between stimuli cannot be discounted, "the accumulation of evidence does

justify speaking in terms of emotion's memory effects."
















CHAPTER 2
METHOD

Subjects

100 undergraduate students from the University of Florida were recruited from the

Introductory Psychology class and offered course credit in return for participation. The

study was approved by the Health Science Center IRB (IRB-01), and all subjects executed

a written consent form prior to participating.

Equipment

The vignettes were recorded using a Panasonic DV-710 digital camcorder, which

was connected to a Sanyo ProEx Multimedia Projector for viewing. The vignettes were

projected onto a standard white movie screen, yielding a viewing area approximately 5

feet in width and height. The recognition test items were recorded and played on an

audiocassette recorder. Still frames of each scene are presented in Figures 1, 2, and 3.

Design

Subjects were randomly assigned to one of four groups, making for a total of 25

subjects in each group. The demographic characteristics of each group are listed in Table

1. Each subject was run in 3 phases: watching the vignette, taking a True / False test,

then taking a recognition test.

The experiment had two between-subjects conditions. The first condition was

which vignette (neutral or emotional) the subjects viewed. Each vignette was









Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Each Group (Entire Subject Pool)

# of Males # of Females Average Age (in years)

Emotional 6 19 18.68
Misinformation
Neutral 6 19 18.92

Emotional 6 19 19.96
No Misinf.
Neutral 7 18 18.68


Figure 1: Scene Number One











,*. .". .. ..

T '1
^ L-.1


! 1
4W


Figure 2: Scene Number Two


'9^












'7-


Figure 3: Scene Number Three

approximately the same length (4 minutes long). They were each split into 3 separate

scenes. The first and second scenes each lasted approximately 1 /2 minutes, while the

third scene lasted a little over a minute. The neutral vignette consisted of a man and a

woman discussing their day and plans for the weekend. The emotional vignette consisted

of the same man and woman arguing about their possible exposure to AIDS, with the man

striking the woman midway through the vignette. In every other respect (clothing,

camera angle, etc.) the vignettes were identical. Minor differences in lighting were

present, due to the fact that the emotional and neutral vignettes were filmed on 2 different

days.









The second condition was which written test the subject received before the

recognition test (misinformation or no misinformation). The misinformation test asked

True / False questions about the vignettes in such a way as to suggest the existence of

details that were not actually present. For example, one question was "In the first scene,

the man glanced at his wristwatch." In fact, he was not wearing a watch. The no

misinformation test asked the same questions without the misinformation. To continue

the above example, the no-misinformation question read "In the first scene, the man

glanced at his wrist." Both the misinformation and no misinformation conditions asked

subjects to rate the vignette as to how emotional they felt after viewing it, using a 1-10

scale. They were also asked how interesting they thought it was, and how well they

thought they remembered it (again using a 10-point scale). Each group received the same

recognition test. The test consisted of a voice saying a series of items (for example

"Number one -- candlestick, number two -- coffee machine, number three -- red sweater,"

and so forth). There were 3 types of items: items present on the tape, items suggested

through misinformation, and items neither present nor suggested.

The items present or suggested were classified as central items, peripheral items ,

or person-centered items. Person-centered items consisted of items worn by the actors.

They were treated differently from the other items, as these items were present in all 3

scenes. All other items were either present in only one scene, or suggested as being

present in only one scene. Each scene was composed with the actors facing each other,

the camera being placed roughly perpendicular to their sight line (see Figures 1-3). With

respect to items actually present, "central" items were classified as such based on the fact

that they were in between the two actors, close to the spatial center of the screen.









"Peripheral" items were classified as such based on them being close to the left or right

edge of the screen.

With each condition, the design is as follows:


Written Test

Misinformation No Misinformation

Low emotion 25 25

Vignette:

High emotion 25 25



Procedure

Subjects were run in groups of 4 to 8, depending on how many enrolled for a

given time. Subjects were seated equidistantly from a movie screen, each with an

unimpeded view. They received the following instructions: "This is a test of memory. I

want you to watch the following tape carefully." The subjects then watched the

appropriate vignette. After watching the vignette, each subject was given a brief

questionnaire about the vignette, asking them to rate the vignette on how emotional they

thought it was, how interesting they thought it was, and how well they thought they

remembered it. They were then given the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), a

measure that assesses both acute and chronic symptoms of anxiety. Finally, they were

given the True / False questionnaire. Ten minutes from the end of the vignette, the tests

were collected and a new sheet was handed out with numbered blank spaces. The

subjects were instructed as follows: "The last part of the experiment today is another test









of memory. You will be listening to a voice on this tape machine. The voice will say a

number of different items. Some of these items were on the tape you saw earlier, and

other items were not. I want you to listen to each item and write down 'yes' if you

remember seeing it on the tape and 'no' if you do not remember seeing it." After the

subjects completed the test and their papers were collected, they were given the

opportunity to be debriefed as to the true purpose of the study.

Data Analysis

Recognition test. On the recognition test, there were several different types of

items: There were genuine items, indicating items that were actually present in the

vignette. These were divided into central, peripheral, and person-centered items. There

were suggested items, indicating items that were not present in the vignette, but were

suggested to be present. These were divided into central (suggested), peripheral

(suggested), and person-centered (suggested) items. Finally, there were spoiler items that

were neither present nor suggested. Since the no-misinformation groups did not have

items suggested to them, the central and peripheral suggested items were treated as

spoilers as well. For genuine items, the number of hits (correct recognition of the item)

was recorded. For suggested items, the number of "hits" was recorded for subjects in the

Misinformation conditions. For spoilers, the number of false alarms was recorded.

Statistical analysis included an ANOVA done on hits for both misinformation and

no misinformation groups. Group (misinformation vs. no-misinformation) and Vignette

(emotional vs. neutral) were between-subjects variables, and item type (central vs.

peripheral) and scene (one vs. two vs. three) were within-subjects variables:









Group

Misinformation No misinformation

Vignette Neutral # hits(c)/# hits(p) # hits(c)/# hits(p)

Emotional # hits(c)/# hits(p) # hits(c)/# hits(p)



Planned comparisons using the Bonferroni method were made between those subjects

who viewed the neutral tape, and those subjects who viewed the emotional tape. Only

those subjects who did not receive misinformation were included in the planned

comparison. This made for 6 planned comparisons: 1 comparison between Emotional

and Neutral subjects for each Location x Scene group mean (Peripheral items in Scene 1,

Central items in Scene 1, etc). The family wise error rate was set at p = 0.1 for this set of

comparisons. Another ANOVA was conducted with hits on person-centered items as the

dependent variable. These items were considered separately from the other hits, as they

were present in all 3 scenes (as opposed to the peripheral and central items, which were

each present in only one scene). An additional ANOVA was conducted on

misinformation items. Only the subjects in the Misinformation conditions were included

in this ANOVA. Vignette Type (emotional v. neutral) served as a between-subjects

factor, and Location (central v. peripheral v. personal) and Scene (1 v. 2 v. 3) were

within-subjects factors. Planned comparisons using the Bonferroni method were made

between Emotional and Neutral Subjects for each Location x Scene group mean. This

made for 9 planned comparisons. The family wise error rate was set at p = 0.1 for this set

of comparisons. Finally, an ANOVA was conducted on the false alarm rate, with









Vignette Type (emotional v. neutral) and Misinformation Condition (misinformation v.

no misinformation) as between-subjects factors.

Story data. In addition to the recognition test, data was collected on the True /

False test subjects took prior to taking the recognition test. Six questions were selected,

which were the same across all conditions. These questions each considered a specific

action in a specific scene, asking whether the action took place or not. Two questions for

each scene were selected. The subjects' responses to each question (accurate or

inaccurate) were recorded. An ANOVA was conducted with Vignette Type and

Misinformation Condition as between-subjects factors, and Question (1 through 6) as the

within-subjects factor.
















CHAPTER 3
RESULTS

Entire Dataset
Hypothesis 1


The first hypothesis suggested that in the condition without misinformation,

subjects who view an emotional scene would have enhanced memory for central details

and impaired memory for peripheral details compared to subjects who view a neutral

scene. To test for this, planned comparisons were made on the "Hits" data for subjects in

the No Misinformation condition, between the Emotional and Neutral subjects for each

Location (central vs. peripheral) x Scene (1 vs. 2 vs. 3) group mean. These planned

comparisons showed no differences between the Emotional and Neutral subjects for each

Location x Scene mean. Thus, the first hypothesis was not supported.

Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis suggested that in the condition with misinformation,

subjects who view an emotional scene would be more likely to accept misinformation

related to peripheral items, and less likely to accept misinformation related to central

items, compared to subjects who view a neutral scene. To test for this, planned

comparisons were made on the Misinformation data for subjects in the Misinformation

condition, between the Emotional and Neutral subjects for each Location (central vs.

peripheral vs. person-centered) x Scene (1 vs. 2 vs. 3) group mean. These planned









comparisons showed no differences between the Emotional and Neutral subjects for each

Location x Scene mean. Thus, the second hypothesis was not supported.

Exploratory Analyses

Self-report rating. T-tests were conducted on the self-report variables of

Memory (how well the subject thought he or she remembered the vignette), Emotion

(how emotional the subject found the tape to be), and Interest (how interesting the subject

found the tape to be), with the Vignette Type (Emotional v. Neutral) as the grouping

factor. Since all subjects made their self-report ratings before receiving the True / False

test that established which Misinformation condition they were in, subjects in each

Emotion condition were collapsed across the two levels of Misinformation. Results of

the t-test comparing memory for the Emotional and Neutral conditions was not significant

[T (98) = 1.642, p = .104], indicating that the subjects rated their memory for the

vignettes about the same, regardless of whether they viewed the emotional or neutral

vignette. The t-test for Emotion was significant [T (98) = 10.022, p < .001]. As

expected, subjects who viewed the emotional vignette rated it as being more emotional

than subjects who viewed the neutral vignette. The t-test for Interest was also significant

[T (98) = 7.678, p < .001], indicating that subjects who viewed the emotional vignette

rated it as being more interesting than subjects who viewed the neutral vignette. T-tests

on the STAI data were also run, with Vignette Type (Emotional v. Neutral) as the

grouping factor. The t-tests for both the State scale [T (98) = -.820, p = .414] and Trait

scale [T (98) = .055, p = .956] were not significant. Means and standard deviations for

these self-report ratings are presented in Table 2.









Table 2: Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings and STAI Scores
(Entire Subject Pool)
Self-Report Ratings STAI Scores
Vignette Type Memory Emotion Interest State Trait

Emotional 7.86 (1.43) 5.76 (2.31) 5.6 (2.13) 31.6(8.3) 37.9(9.3)

Neutral 7.44 (1.11) 2.22 (0.95) 2.6 (1.76) 33.0(9.5) 37.9(8.9)


Hits. A 2 (Vignette Type; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation Condition;

Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 3 (Scene; 1,2,3) x 2 (Location; Central,

Peripheral) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted on hits (items from the

recognition test correctly recognized as being present in the vignettes). The means for

these variables are presented in Table 3.

Table 3: Mean values and standard deviations for correct recognition of peripheral and
central items, presented for each condition (Entire Subject Pool)
Item Type Peripheral Central
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3

Emotional .96 .72 1.12 1.08 1.24 1.16
(.539) (.737) (.781) (.493) (.663) (.473)
Misinformation
Neutral .84 .6 .88 .88 1.2 1.08
(.746) (.645) (.666) (.666) (.707) (.277)

Emotional 1.04 .68 1.16 1.12 1.16 1.04
(.611) (.690) (.850) (.526) (.8) (.2)
No Misinf.
Neutral .72 .64 1.36 1.08 .88 1.08
(.614) (.7) (.757) (.64) (.726) (.493)

Note: For each cell, there are a total of two items that may be recognized. So perfect
recognition for all subjects for a certain cell would result in a mean value of 2.0 for that
cell.


There was a significant main effect for Location [F (1, 96) = 5.415, p < .001], indicating

that recognition of central items was superior to recognition of peripheral items. There









was also a main effect for Scene [F (2, 192) = 5.736, p < .005], demonstrating that

recognition for items from the 3rd scene in the vignette was superior to recognition of

items presented in the previous scenes. The polynomial test of order for scene was

significant [F (1, 96) = 4.868, p < .05], indicating a significant linear trend in hits (with

recognition improving for each subsequent scene). Finally, there was a significant

Location x Scene interaction [F (2, 192)= 8.944, p < .001]. This interaction is presented

in Figure 4. The separate ANOVA conducted on the person-centered items showed no

significant effects or interactions.


1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
S- Peripheral
0.9
-09 -- Central
0.8
0.7 -
0.6
0.5
0.4
Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

Figure 4 Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central cues (Entire
Subject Pool)


False alarms. A 2 (Vignette Type; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation

Condition; Misinformation, No Misinformation) ANOVA was conducted on the false

alarm rate (calculated by dividing the number of false alarms by the total number of

spoilers present). The ANOVA revealed no significant effects or interactions.









Table 4: Mean values for False Alarms and Person-Centered Items, presented for each
condition (Entire Subject Pool)
False Alarm Rate Person-Centered Items

Emotional 10.8% 2.2 (.913)
Misinformation
Neutral 12.4% 2.08 (.759)

Emotional 11.3% 2.36 (.757)
No Misinf.
Neutral 13.3% 2.2 (.707)



Misinformation. A 2 (Vignette Type; Emotional, Neutral) x 3 (Scene; 1, 2, 3) x

3 (Location; Suggested Peripheral v. Suggested Central v. Suggested Personal) repeated

measures ANOVA was conducted for Misinformation items, using the subjects who

participated in the Misinformation conditions. The means for these variables are

presented in Table 5. There was only one significant result, a Location x Scene

interaction [F (4, 192) = 16.577, p < .001]. There were no significant interactions with

Vignette Type.

Table 5: Mean values and standard deviations for acceptance of suggested peripheral,
central, and personal items, presented for each Misinformation condition (Entire Subject
Pool)
Item Peripheral Central Personal
Type
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Em. .4 .56 .44 .28 .52 .24 .68 .12 .48
(.5) (.507) (.507) (.458) (.51) (.436) (.476) (.332) (.507)
Misinf.
Neut. .36 .4 .52 .12 .52 .32 .68 .20 .4
(.49) (.5) (.51) (.332) (.51) (.476) (.476) (.408) (.5)

Note: For each cell, there is one suggested item. Therefore, each value may also be read
as a percentage. For example, the value ".4" may also be read that 40% of the subjects in
that condition "recognized" the suggested item.









Figure 5, comparing the averages of all misinformation conditions across all 4 between-

subjects groups clearly demonstrates that subjects in the misinformation condition

endorsed the misinformation items with greater frequency than subjects in the no

misinformation condition.


0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4 -
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15--
0.1
0.05 -, ,
Em-Mis Em-No Mis Neut-Mis Neut-No Mis

Figure 5 Mean values for endorsement of misinformation items (Entire Subject Pool)

Story data. A 2 (Vignette Type; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation

Condition; Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 6 (Question; 1-6) repeated measures

ANOVA was conducted on subjects' accuracy on 6 items taken from the True / False test

that sampled various behaviors occurring during the vignettes. Question (1-6) was the

within-subjects factor. The means for these variables are presented in Table 6.

There was a significant main effect for Question [F (5, 480) = 18.350, p < .001]. The

main effect for Misinformation approached significance [F (1, 96) = 2.934, p = .090].

There was a significant Vignette Type x Question interaction [F (5, 480) = 5.985, p. <

.001]. This interaction is presented in Figure 6. It shows that subjects who viewed the

emotional vignette had poorer accuracy for questions that concerned the opening scene.









Table 6: Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented for each
condition (Entire Subject Pool)
Question Question Question Question Question Question
1 2 3 4 5 6

Emotional .52 .4 .88 .88 .88 .68
Misinformation
Neutral 1.0 .64 .76 .8 .8 .52

Emotional .72 .44 1.0 .92 .88 .68
No Misinf.
Neutral .96 .52 .92 .96 .92 .52


100

90 .. ......

80

70
70 ~ \^--- \ -----
0 --- --- Emotional
--60- Neutral
50-

40-

30

20
1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 6 Accuracy rate for selected True / False questions, split by Vignette Type
(Entire Subject Pool)

Comparing the Emotional Subjects

The initial analyses on the Emotion factor revealed significant variability among

subjects in their rating of the vignettes. While it was true that as a whole subjects who

viewed the Emotion Vignette rated the tape as more emotional than those who viewed the

Neutral Vignette, there was more variability in their ratings than expected. Several











subjects who viewed the emotional vignette simply did not find it emotional. There was

some concern that their performance would be closer to those who viewed the neutral

vignettes, and consequently would dilute or otherwise negate the responses of those who

did in fact find the tape emotional. Consequently, it was decided on apost hoc basis to

split the emotional subjects into two groups: those who rated the vignette a "5" or less on

emotionality, and those who rated the vignette a "6" or higher on this variable. The new

groups were labeled the "Low Emotion" group, and the "High Emotion" group. The

"Low Emotion" group yielded 12 subjects in the misinformation condition, and 9 subjects

in the no misinformation condition. This left the "High Emotion" group with 13 subjects

in the misinformation condition, and 16 subjects in the no misinformation condition. Of

interest was whether the "Low" vs. "High" group variable (labeled "Emotion Level" in

the analyses) proved a significant factor in the performance of the subjects. Subjects who

viewed the neutral vignette were not included in this set of analyses.

Self-report ratings. Means for self-report ratings for each condition are

presented in Table 7.

Table 7: Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings and STAI Scores
(Emotional Subiects)
Self-Report Ratings STAI Scores
Group Memory Emotion Interest State Trait

Low Emotional 7.57 (1.89) 3.48 (1.29) 4.1 (1.55) 31.3 (9.1) 36.8 (9.0)

High Emotional 8.01 (0.96) 7.41 (1.18) 6.69(1.82) 31.8(7.8) 38.9(9.5)


The t-test for Memory was not significant [T (48)= -1.109, p = .277], indicating that the

subjects in the "Low" and "High" groups rated their memory for the vignettes about the









same. Not surprisingly, the t-test for the Emotion self-report variable was significant [T

(48) =-11.04, p < .001]. The t-test for the Interest self-report variable was also

significant [T (48) = -5.441, p < .001], demonstrating that those subjects who rated the

vignette as being more emotional also tended to find it more interesting. T-tests on the

STAI data were also run, with Emotion Level (High Emotional v. Low Emotional) as the

grouping factor. The t-tests for both the State scale [T (48) = -.211, p = .834] and Trait

scale [T (48) = -.786, p = .436] were not significant.

Hits. A 2 (Emotion Level; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation Condition;

Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 3 (Scene; 1, 2, 3) x 2 (Location; Peripheral,

Central) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted on the data from subjects viewing

the emotional vignette. Means for these variables are presented in Table 8.

Table 8: Mean values and standard deviations for correct recognition of peripheral and
central items, presented for each condition (Emotional Subjects)
Item Peripheral Central
Type
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3

Low 1.0 .5 1.33 1.17 1.0 1.08
Em. (.603) (.522) (.778) (.577) (.739) (.515)
Misinfor
mation
High .92 .92 .92 1.0 1.46 1.23
Em. (.494) (.862) (.760) (.408) (1.46) (.439)

Low 1.22 1.0 .78 1.22 1.56 1.11
Em. (.441) (.707) (.833) (.441) (.726) (.33)
No
Misinf.
High .94 .5 1.38 1.06 .94 1.0
Em. (.68) (.632) (.806) (.574) (.772) (0.0)
Note: For each cell, there are a total of two items that may be recognized. So perfect
recognition for all subjects for a certain cell would result in a mean value of 2.0 for that
cell.









There was a significant Scene x Misinformation x Emotion Level interaction [F (2, 92) =

8.349, p < .001). This interaction is presented in Figure 7, and demonstrates that, for

subjects in the no misinformation condition, higher ratings of stimulus emotionality led to

inferior recognition of items presented in the second scene.


1.4
1.3
1.2-
A1.1 --Mis-Low
1 -- Mis-High
A -- &--NoMis-Low
0.89 -- x---NoMis-High


0.7
0.6
Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3


Figure 7 Mean values for correct recognition of items in each scene, by Misinformation
Condition and Emlevel (Emotional Subjects)

However, for subjects who did receive misinformation about the vignette higher

emotionality ratings led to superior recognition for items presented in the second scene.

There was also a significant location x scene interaction [F (2, 92) = 4.367, p < .05],

indicating that recognition for peripheral items in the second scene was poorer than

recognition of central items. This interaction is similar to the same interaction shown

with the entire subject pool. There was a significant main effect for Location [F (1, 46) =

13.15, p = .001]. A separate ANOVA conducted on person-centered items revealed no

significant effects or interactions.









False alarms. An ANOVA was conducted on the false alarm rate, with Emotion

Level and Misinformation Condition serving as between-subjects factors. No significant

effects or interactions were observed.

Table 9: Mean values and standard deviations for False Alarms and Person-Centered
Items, presented for each condition (Emotional Subjects)
False Alarm Rate Person-Centered Items

Low Em. 12.5% 2.17 (.835)
Misinformation
High Em. 9.4% 2.23 (1.01)

Low Em. 11.5% 2.22 (.972)
No Misinf.
High Em. 11.1% 2.44 (.629)



Misinformation. A 2 (Emotion Level; High Emotion, Low Emotion) x 3 (Scene;

1, 2, 3) x 3 (Location; suggested central v. suggested peripheral v. suggested personal)

repeated measures ANOVA was conducted for Misinformation items as within-subjects

factors. The means for these variables are presented in Table 10.

Table 10: Mean values and standard deviations for acceptance of suggested peripheral,
central, and personal items, presented for each Misinformation condition (Emotional
Subjects)
Item Peripheral Central Personal
Type
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Low .42 .42 .33 .25 .5 .33 .67 .25 .42
Em. (.515) (.515) (.492) (.452) (.522) (.492) (.492) (.452) (.515)
Misinf.
High .38 .69 .54 .31 .54 .15 .69 .0 .54
Em. (.506) (.480) (.519) (.480) (.519) (.376) (.480) (0.0) (.519)


Note: For each cell, there is one suggested item. Therefore, each value may also be read
as a percentage. For example, the value ".4" may also be read that 40% of the subjects in
that condition "recognized" the suggested item.









There was a significant Location x Scene interaction [F (4, 92) = 7.616, p < .01].

Story data. A 2 (Emotion Level; High Emotional, Low Emotional) x 2

(Misinformation; Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 6 (Question; 1-6) repeated

measures ANOVA was conducted on the 6 True / False items that sampled behavior at

various points during the vignettes. The means for these variables are presented in

Table 11. There was a significant main effect for Question [F (1, 48) = 13.950, p < .001].

Table 11: Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented for each
condition (Emotional Subjects)
Question Question Question Question Question Question
1 2 3 4 5 6

Low .58 .5 .92 .92 .92 .58
Em.
Misinformation
High .46 .31 .85 .85 .85 .77
Em.

Low .67 .33 1.0 1.0 1.0 .67
Em.
No Misinf.
High .75 .5 1.0 .88 .81 .69
Em.




Reduced Dataset

The splitting of the emotional subjects into two groups and comparing them

demonstrated that those subjects who rated the vignettes as more emotional produced

significantly different responses than those who rated the vignettes as less emotional. It

was decided then to rerun the analyses, this time comparing the subjects who viewed the

neutral vignette only to those subjects who viewed the emotional vignette and who rated

it a "6" or higher on the Emotion scale. This reduced the subjects in the "Emotional-









Misinformation" condition from 25 to 13, and reduced the subjects in the "Emotional-No

Misinformation" condition from 25 to 16. There were no changes to subjects in the

Neutral conditions.

Hypothesis 1


The first hypothesis was tested for in the same manner for the reduced dataset as it

was for the entire dataset, in that planned comparisons were made on the "Hits" data for

subjects in the No Misinformation condition, between the Emotional and Neutral subjects

for each Location (central vs. peripheral) x Scene (1 vs. 2 vs. 3) group mean. These

planned comparisons showed no differences between the Emotional and Neutral subjects

for each Location x Scene mean. Thus, the first hypothesis was again not supported.

Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis was tested for in the same manner for the reduced dataset

as it was for the entire dataset, in that planned comparisons were made on the

Misinformation data for subjects in the Misinformation condition, between the Emotional

and Neutral subjects for each Location (central vs. peripheral vs. person-centered) x

Scene (1 vs. 2 vs. 3) group mean. Planned comparisons between subjects in each

Vignette Type condition yielded a close to significant difference between Emotional and

Neutral subjects for the suggested peripheral item in Scene 2 [F (1, 144) = 5.324], where

the critical value for F was 6.64. This difference is shown in Figure 9, and suggests that

subjects who viewed the emotional vignette were more likely to accept misinformation

for a peripheral item in the second scene, than subjects who viewed the neutral vignette.









Exploratory Analyses

Self-report ratings. Means for self-report ratings for each condition are

presented in Table 12.

Table 12: Means and Standard Deviations for Self-Report Ratings (Reduced Subject
Pool)
Self-Report Ratings STAI Scores
Vig. Type Memory Emotion Interest State Trait

Emotional 8.07 (0.96) 7.41 (1.18) 6.69 (1.82) 31.8(7.8) 38.9 (9.5)

Neutral 7.44 (1.11) 2.22 (0.95) 2.6 (1.76) 33.0(9.5) 37.9(8.9)


The t-test for the Memory self-report variable was significant [T (77) = 2.547, p < .05),

indicating that subjects who viewed the emotional vignette reported greater confidence in

their memory for the vignette than those who viewed the neutral vignette. The t-tests for

the Emotion and Interest self-report variables were also significant [T (77) = 21.353, p <

.000; T (77) = 9.760, p < .000, respectively), indicating that those subjects who viewed

the emotional vignette rated it as both more emotional and more interesting than the

neutral vignette. T-tests on the STAI data were also run, with Vignette Type (Emotional

v. Neutral) as the grouping factor. The t-tests for both the State scale [T (77) = -.601, p =

.550] and Trait scale [T (77) = .462, p = .646] were not significant.

Hits. A 2 (Vignette Type; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation;

Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 3 (Scene; 1, 2, 3) x 2 (Location; Peripheral,

Central) repeated measures ANOVA was conducted on the reduced data set. Data for this

analysis are presented in Table 13. There was a significant location x scene x

Misinformation interaction [F (2, 150) = 3.886, p < .05]. This interaction is presented in









Table 13: Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central items, presented
for each condition (Reduced Subject Pool)
Item Type Peripheral Central
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3

Emotional .92 .92 .92 1.0 1.46 1.23
(.494) (.862) (.760) (.408) (.519) (.439)
Misinformation
Neutral .84 .6 .88 .88 1.2 1.08
(.746) (.645) (.667) (.667) (.707) (.277)

Emotional .94 .5 1.38 1.06 .94 1.0
(.68) (.632) (.806) (.574) (.772) (0.0)
No Misinf.
Neutral .72 .64 1.36 1.08 .88 1.08
(.614) (.7) (.757) (.64) (.726) (.493)

Note: For each cell, there are a total of two items that may be recognized. So perfect
recognition for all subjects for a certain cell would result in a mean value of 2.0 for that
cell.

Figure 8. Three significant two-way interactions were found. There was a Scene x

Misinformation interaction [F (2, 150) = 5.239, p < .01], indicating that subjects who did

not receive misinformation had poorer recognition for items in scene 2, but better

recognition for items in scene 3. There was a Location x Misinformation interaction [F

(1,75) = 4.34, p < .05], indicating that subjects who received misinformation had better

recognition for central then peripheral items, and better recognition for central items than

subjects who did not receive misinformation. There was a Location x Scene interaction

[F (2, 150) = 6.496, p < .01], indicating that subjects had poorer recognition for peripheral

items from scene 2. There was a significant main effect for Location [F (1, 75)= 14.193,

p < .01), indicating that subjects had better recognition for central than peripheral items.

There was also a significant main effect for Scene [F (2, 150) = 4.851, p < .01],

demonstrating that recognition for items from the 3rd scene in the vignette was superior to


























Scene 1


Scene 2


-- Mis-P
- -Mis-C
----NNo Mis-P
- --x--- No Mis-C


Scene 3


Figure 8-Mean values for correct recognition of peripheral and central items, split by
Misinformation Condition (Reduced Subject Pool)

recognition of items presented in the previous scenes. The separate ANOVA conducted

on person-centered items revealed no significant effects or interactions.

False alarms. An ANOVA was conducted on the false alarm rate, with Vignette

Type and Misinformation Condition serving as between-subjects factors. No significant

effects or interactions were observed.


Table 14: Mean values and standard deviations for False Alarms and Person-Centered
Items, presented for each condition (Reduced Subject Pool)


False Alarm Rate


Person-Centered Items


Emotional 9.4% 2.23 (1.01)
Misinformation
Neutral 12.4% 2.08 (.759)

Emotional 11.1% 2.44 (.629)
No Misinf.
Neutral 13.3% 2.2 (.707)


A



-x ---



I I









Misinformation. A 2 (Vignette; Emotional, Neutral) x 3 (Scene; 1, 2, 3) x 3

(Location; suggested central, suggested peripheral, suggested personal) repeated measures

ANOVA was conducted for Misinformation items. The data for this analysis are

presented in Table 15.

Table 15: Mean values for acceptance of suggested peripheral, central, and personal
items, presented for each Misinformation condition (Reduced Subject Pool)
Item Peripheral Central Personal
Type
Scene 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Em. .38 .69 .54 .31 .54 .15 .69 .0 .54
(.506) (.480) (.519) (.480) (.519) (.376) (.480) (0.0) (.519)
Misinf.
Neut. .36 .4 .52 .12 .52 .32 .68 .20 .4
(.49) (.5) (.51) (.332) (.51) (.476) (.476) (.408) (.5)

Note: For each cell, there is one suggested item. Therefore, each value may also be read
as a percentage. For example, the value ".4" may also be read that 40% of the subjects in
that condition "recognized" the suggested item.

There was a significant Location x Scene X Vignette Type interaction [F (4, 144) = 2.553,

p < .05]. This interaction is presented in Figures 9, 10, and 11. The interaction suggests

that subjects who watched the emotional vignette were more likely to accept

misinformation that a peripheral item was present in the second scene. There was also a

significant Location x Scene interaction [F (4, 144) = 16.135, p < .001]. The main effect

for Location approached significance [F (2, 72) = 2.889, p = .068].

Story data. A 2 (Vignette; Emotional, Neutral) x 2 (Misinformation;

Misinformation, No Misinformation) x 6 (Question; 1-6) repeated measures ANOVA was

conducted on the 6 True / False items that sampled behavior at various points during the

vignettes. The data for this analysis are presented in Table 16.
















..-- --Em-P
0.4 ....-. A-,'-"E m
0.4. -- --- Neutral-P
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 -
Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3


Figure 9-Mean values for suggested peripheral items later "recognized" by subjects in
the Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette Type (Reduced Subject Pool)


- Em-C
-- Neutral-C


Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3


Figure 10-Mean values for suggested central items later "recognized" by subjects in the
Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette Type (Reduced Subiect Pool)










0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
--- Em-PC
0.4
0.4 ----Neutral-PC
0.3--
0.2 ---
0.1
0 Y
Scene 1 Scene 2 Scene 3

Figure 11-Mean values for suggested person-centered items later "recognized" by
subjects in the Misinformation Condition, split by Vignette Type (Reduced Subject Pool)

Table 16: Mean values for correct responses to 6 True / False items, presented for each
condition (Reduced Subject Pool)
Question Question Question Question Question Question
1 2 3 4 5 6

Emotional .46 .31 .85 .85 .85 .77
Misinformation
Neutral 1.0 .64 .76 .8 .8 .52

Emotional .75 .5 1.0 .88 .81 .69
No Misinf.
Neutral .96 .52 .92 .96 .92 .52



There was a significant Question x Vignette Type interaction [F (5, 375) = 4.806, p <

.001], indicating that subjects who viewed the emotional vignette had poorer accuracy for

questions that concerned the opening scene. The main effect for Question [F (5, 375) =

11.620, p < .001] was significant, and the main effect for Misinformation Condition

approached significance [F (1, 75) = 3.305, p = .073].
















CHAPTER 4
DISCUSSION

Self-Report Data

The subjects' self report responses to the vignettes were as expected, in that those

who viewed the emotional vignette tended to rate it as being more emotional and more

interesting than those who viewed the neutral vignette. One result that was somewhat

unexpected was the relatively low group mean for the subjects viewing the emotional

vignette, regarding how emotional they found the vignette to be. This result, combined

with the relatively high variability within the group for this variable, did not prevent the

emotional group's overall score from being significantly higher than the neutral group's

score. It does demonstrate that, within the emotional group, there were those who found

the tape to be quite emotional, and those who found the tape to not be very emotional at

all.

One important aspect of this research is that it is the individual's personal

response to an event, not the "nominal" emotional category to which an event belongs,

that influences subsequent memory for the event. Consequently, the variability in rated

emotion within the subjects who viewed the emotional vignette could potentially reflect

significant variability regarding their later performance on the memory tasks. Indeed,

when the emotional group was split into 2 groups depending on the self-report rating for









emotion, the 2 groups were found to have different performance patterns on recognition

for objects from the vignette. The nature of this difference will be discussed later.

In a way, the high variability in emotion self-report scores should not have been

that surprising. When the study conducted by Andrews [36] addressed the concept of

"arousability," it was addressing the notion that some subjects would be more likely to

become emotional in response to a scene than others. The results of this study indicated

that subjects' ratings of how arousable they were interacted with how well they

remembered emotional scenes. The chain of implications is as follows: subjects who are

more arousable are more likely to become emotional (or, perhaps, become more

emotional) in response to a specific scene. Those subjects who become emotional then

have a memory advantage for such scenes. One could postulate that those subjects who

rated the "emotion" vignette as being more emotional would have rated themselves as

being more arousable, should they have been given the same measure that Andrews [36]

used.

The gathering of this self-report data has 2 important uses for the experimenter.

First, such data allow the experimenter to account for a significant source of variability in

the data. Second, such data provide a means to control for the stimuli-difference

confound discussed earlier. When comparing subjects who view emotional v. neutral

vignettes, there is a confound when attempting to hypothesize the source of any group

differences. Those differences could be due to a difference in emotionality, but there are

significant stimuli differences that could also potentially account for the differences.

Although Burke, Heuer, & Reisberg [31] argued that the preponderance of evidence

argues that such differences can be attributed to the effects of emotion, they also agree









that differences in stimuli cannot simply be ignored. In the case of differing degrees of

emotionality, the subjects have viewed the same stimuli; they simply have differing levels

of emotional response to it. Consequently, any group differences observed can be

attributed to the effects of emotion with more certainty. In this respect, it was fortuitous

that self-report data were gathered for the present experiment. However, because the data

were gathered after the subjects were exposed to the stimulus, there is the danger of

falling into circular reasoning regarding how such data is to be interpreted. This will be

discussed later.

One other result of interest regarding the self-report data is the nearly identical

ratings between groups regarding how well they believed that they remembered the

vignettes. It is important to note that this rating was taken before the subjects were asked

to recall or recognize anything about the vignettes. In future studies, it would be useful to

ask the subjects to rate their memory for the vignettes both before and after they complete

the recall and recognition tests. The post-test rating would be roughly equivalent to

previous studies that rated the confidence with which subjects reported what they

remembered.

"Hits" Data

One hypothesis for the present study was that subjects who viewed the emotional

vignette would have superior recognition for central items, and inferior recognition for

peripheral items, compared to subjects who viewed the neutral vignette. This hypothesis

was not supported by the results. The Vignette Type factor (Emotional v. Neutral) did

not interact significantly with any of the "hits" variables in the design for either the entire









subject pool or the reduced subject pool, indicating that the vignette the subjects watched

was not a factor in how well they recognized items that were present in the vignette.

In the comparison made of subjects in the Emotion Condition, split by how

emotional they found the vignette to be, there is evidence that emotion played some role

in subject's memory for actual items presented in the vignette. The interaction presented

in Figure 3 demonstrates that, for subjects in the no misinformation condition, higher

ratings of stimulus emotionality led to inferior recognition of items presented in the

second scene. However, for subjects who did receive misinformation about the vignette

higher emotionality ratings led to superior recognition for items presented in the second

scene.

This unexpected interaction indicates that exposure to misinformation may affect

the ability to accurately recognize items that were actually present in the vignettes. The

fact that misinformation has such an impact is further borne out by the Location x Scene

x Misinformation interaction generated by the reduced subject pool (see Figure 4). There

has been speculation by researchers regarding the effect of misinformation on original

memory. Hypotheses have ranged from misinformation taking the place of the original

memory, to misinformation making the retrieval of original memories more difficult [12].

However, these hypotheses have usually involved an attempt to mislead a subject that one

item that they saw was actually another. For example, Loftus, Feldman, & Dashiell [37]

discussed an experiment where subjects saw a slide of a woman handling a hammer.

They were later misled to believe that the woman was actually holding a screwdriver. In

this example, the misinformation was explicitly designed to interfere with the original









memory of the hammer. The present experiment demonstrates that misinformation

affected the subjects' recognition of totally unrelated objects.

Another way that misinformation may affect recognition of genuine items is the

phenomenon of retroactive interference. Schacter [38] provided a brief overview of this

phenomenon, a basic example being that once a subject has learned one word pair,

learning a second pair will interfere with his ability to recall the first pair. This

explanation would suggest that subjects exposed to misinformation would have poorer

recognition for genuine items across the board. The nature of the interaction presented in

Figure 3, however, suggests that misinformation actually improves recognition for items

in certain circumstances.

The reconstructive nature of memory may provide an explanation for the

suggestion that misinformation improves recognition in some situations, and impairs

recognition in others. If a question that involves planting misinformation causes the

subject to reconstruct a memory in order to answer the question, that reconstruction may

alter other aspects of the subject's recollection. For example, one True / False question

that attempts to plant misinformation reads: "In the second scene, the radio below the

center table was switched on." A subject, after reading this question, may reconstruct a

memory of the second scene in order to determine if a radio was under the center table.

This reconstruction may involve the retrieval of other items on or around the center table,

which could potentially improve the subject's recognition of those items later on.

Another question reads: "The mail on the couch in the second scene had been opened."

This question may lead a subject to reconstruct a memory of the couch in order to

determine if there was mail on the couch. This reconstruction would most likely not









include the flag that is behind the couch, as it is not spatially close to the area of interest.

Thus, a subject focused on reconstructing a memory of the couch may have poorer

recognition for the flag, because his reconstructed memory has been focused on the couch

area. An analysis of Figure 4 reveals that, in the second scene, those subjects who

received misinformation had improved recognition for genuine central items compared to

subjects who did not receive misinformation. By contrast, subjects who received

misinformation did not have improved recognition for genuine peripheral items.

Figure 4 also shows that subjects who did receive misinformation had poorer

recognition for peripheral items in the third scene, compared to subjects who did not

receive misinformation. The question regarding peripheral misinformation for the third

scene was: "In the third scene, the bag of chips in the right corner had been opened." In

this instance, the scene is framed in such a way that there is very little space on the right

side between the refrigerator and the edge of the frame, and this space is occupied by a

teapot-one of the genuine peripheral items (see Picture 3). Consequently, a subject

receiving the misinformation may, in reconstructing the scene, replace the teapot with a

bag of chips, resulting in impaired recognition for the teapot later on.

In any event, there is insufficient control in the present study to conclusively

determine just how the misinformation condition interacts with subjects' recognition of

genuine items. A future study may, through careful placement of items in the vignettes,

provide a better understanding of how being exposed to misinformation affects subjects'

memory processes.









Story Data

With respect to the story recall data, it is particularly important to consider the

potential impact of the confound between vignette differences and emotionality. Figure 2

shows a significant difference between subjects who viewed the emotional tape versus the

subjects who viewed the neutral tape, with the emotional group having much poorer

accuracy for the first question. It is tempting to simply ascribe this difference to the

emotion factor and to conclude that subjects viewing the emotional tape were not paying

attention to elements of the story in the first scene and consequently had poorer accuracy

for questions about that scene. It is worthwhile, however, to examine the question itself

and how what it samples may be different across the two vignettes. The question reads:

"In the first scene, the man touched the woman's knee." In the neutral vignette, the man

touched the woman's knee as if he were brushing something off of it. In the emotional

scene, he touched her knee as an effort at reconciliation. However, in the emotional

scene the woman jerked her knee away very quickly. This could potentially lead subjects

viewing this vignette to believe that the man attempted to touch the woman's knee, but

did not actually do so. Significantly, this possible misperception is not necessarily related

to the emotional content of the scene. As such, it cannot be concluded that the difference

between the emotional and neutral groups is due to the differing level of emotionality. In

future studies, it will be important to ensure that any such details remain as identical as

possible across vignettes.

Misinformation Data

The second hypothesis of the present study was that, in the misinformation

condition, subjects who viewed the emotional vignette would be more likely to accept









misinformation regarding peripheral items (that is, a suggestion that an item was present

on the periphery of the image), and less likely to accept misinformation regarding central

items, than subjects who viewed the neutral vignette. With respect to the reduced dataset,

this hypothesis was partially supported. The significant interaction that was generated

suggests that subjects who viewed the emotional vignette and rated it as being more

emotional were more likely to accept misinformation regarding peripheral items, but this

only appeared to be the case when it regarded the second scene. It is important to note

that the planned comparisons only yielded a close to significant result for this

comparison, and as such it should be interpreted with caution. It is perhaps significant

that this scene contained the critical element in which the man appeared to slap the

woman in the emotional vignette. There was no difference, however, between the

emotional and neutral subjects with respect to acceptance of misinformation about central

items or person-centered items. In other words, subjects who viewed the emotion

vignette were not less likely to accept misinformation regarding central items. This part

of the hypothesis was not supported.

The results of the analysis of misinformation data show that it was not difficult to

get subjects to "recognize" items that were merely suggested to them. For the most part,

however, there were no significant differences between subjects who viewed the

emotional vignette and subjects who viewed the neutral vignette. The close to significant

difference between emotional and neutral subjects in the second scene for peripheral cues

could be due to the fact that a particularly emotional event occurred in the second scene.

It could be that it took such a potent event to produce the "narrowing" effect hypothesized

by researchers such as Burke, Heuer, & Reisberg [31].









In discussing the second scene, it is important to note that many of the interactions

noted revolve around differences that exist in that scene, compared to the first and third

scenes. It is most likely not a coincidence that the most distinctive event in all the

vignettes, the slap, occurs in the second scene. One argument, just noted, is that the slap

that occurs in the second scene produced a narrowing of attention. This argument

presupposes that it is the emotional element of the event that produces the narrowing of

attention, and thus produces the differences in recognition and misinformation

acceptance. Another phenomenon that may potentially explain the interactions that

revolve around this scene is the von Restorff effect [39]. One example of this effect is

asking subjects to memorize a string of letters, which have a number in the middle (e.g.

qwer7tyui). The effect is found when subjects have greater recall for the number, which

stands out in the middle of the string, than for the letters. It should be noted that this

effect is based on distinctiveness and novelty, rather than emotionality.

In the context of the present study, the von Restorff effect would demonstrate

itself based on memory for the event of the slap, versus memory of other behaviors

performed by the actors in the vignettes. Unfortunately, memory for the slap itself was

not sampled, in part because it only occurred in the emotional vignette. One way that this

could have been dealt with would be to have a question in the True/False test that

sampled behavior connected with the slap, which also occurred in the neutral scene. For

example, in both vignettes the man stood up in the middle of the second scene; in the

emotional scene to slap the woman, and in the neutral scene to ostensibly wave away an

insect. This behavior could have been sampled, with the expectation that recognition for









it would be better for subjects who viewed the emotional vignette, versus subjects who

viewed the neutral vignette.

Presuming for a moment that the von Restorff effect exists in the present study,

linking it to the resulting interactions would require an understanding of how a novel and

distinctive stimulus affects recall or recognition of other elements in the scene. In the

study conducted by Loftus and Christianson [30], they placed just such a distinctive event

in the critical slide in 2 of the 3 conditions. In one, the distinctive event could be said to

have an emotionally charged component, in that a woman was shown lying beside a

bicycle, suggesting that she had been in an accident. In another, the woman was shown

carrying the bicycle over her head. You will recall that the group shown the "accident"

slide had improved memory for details central to the action (such as the color of the

woman's coat), and impaired memory for peripheral details, compared to a group that

was shown the woman riding the bicycle. By contrast, the group shown the slide where

the woman is carrying the bicycle demonstrated impaired memory for both central and

peripheral details. These results suggest that novel and distinctive events can have an

inhibitory effect on memory. However, under certain circumstances subjects will have

enhanced memory for details immediately surrounding the main action. Loftus and

Christianson suggested that it was the emotional component of the stimulus that provided

the differential recognition of central versus peripheral details.

Limitations and Future Directions

The present study has several methodological limitations that inhibit full

understanding of the results that have been generated. This section will outline these









limitations and attempt to provide solutions that would make follow-up studies more

productive.

Individual differences. One major limitation of the present study is the lack of

individual differences data. While the study collected data on subjects' personal reactions

to the taped vignettes, no information was gathered regarding individual differences that

existedprior to exposure to the stimulus. Why is this important? In the present study,

the emotional subjects were split into 2 groups on the basis of their self-report regarding

how emotional they found the stimulus. In using such a distinction to define the subjects,

a circular argument is created. For example, in discussing the results of comparing the

"high" emotion subjects with the "low" emotion subjects, it was hypothesized that the

differences noted were due to differences in how emotional the subjects found the

vignettes. Thus, the subjects reacted to the stimulus based on how emotional they were.

How do we know how emotional they were? By how they reacted to the stimulus. Put

another way, the snake is eating its own tail. By gathering no data prior to exposure to

the stimulus, the experiment creates a closed system, in which hypotheses about subjects'

individual characteristics are severely limited. This lesson is taught in statistics, where in

running an analysis of covariance it is a given that one cannot use as a covariate any

variable that is manipulated by the experimental procedure. Just as the purpose of an

ANCOVA is to account for confounding variables that existed prior to the experimental

manipulation, the purpose of individual differences data is to determine pre-existing

characteristics of the individual subjects that may affect how they perform during the

experiment. Thus, in terms of obtaining individual difference information, it is crucial to

gather such data before the subject is exposed to the stimulus.









Individual differences data could be gathered on a number of factors. One factor

could be along the lines of the "arousability" factor gathered by Andrews [36],

determining how easy it is for the individual to become angry, or otherwise emotional in

life. Another factor that could be important is the extent to which an individual has a

vivid imagination, or the ease with which an individual can create mental images. One

hypothesis would be that individuals with particularly vivid imaginations would be more

susceptible to misinformation. Because they can easily create a mental image, they may

be more prone to creating such an image in response to misinformation items, and

consequently more likely to make an error of reality monitoring, and confuse their mental

picture with the actual memory of the vignette. Another factor would be autobiographical

in nature. Given that the emotional vignette hinges on issues of domestic violence and

AIDS, individuals' prior experience with these issues could be significant. For example,

a subject who in fact has AIDS, or who has been in abusive relationships, would be

expected to have a stronger reaction to the emotional vignette than a subject with no such

experience. Such apriori measures could be factored into the design as a covariate. To

sum up, the more the experimenter knows about individual subjects prior to the

experimental manipulation, the more they will be able to predict about the results, and the

better they will be able to explain the resulting data.

Central vs. peripheral details. In making determinations regarding whether or

not a particular item was "central" to the scene or "peripheral" to the scene, the only

consideration given was spatial in nature. Objects that were either in contact with the

actors, or were in between the actors, were determined to be "central," while objects that

were off to the side of either actor were determined to be "peripheral." A number of









important distinctions were left out of this determination. For example, there was no

effort made to distinguish between items that were in the foreground, such as the wine

bottle in scene 3, and items in the background, such as the statue in scene 1. In addition,

some items were presented in their traditional, "canonical" form (again, the wine bottle),

while some were presented in an unusual "non-canonical" form. The paper plate in scene

3, for example, is presented as a decoration on the refrigerator, rather than as one would

expect, lying on a table. No distinction between these types of items was made. So many

differences existed between the various items, that efforts to explain differences in data

between "central" and "peripheral" types of items, particularly in consideration to how

misinformation influenced them, quickly devolved into taking each item on an individual

basis. Thus, the advantage of collapsing the items into central and peripheral types

disappeared.

In essence, the distinction between "central" and "peripheral" items rested on a

presumption that the space containing the two actors, including that space between them

where the central items were located, would be where the attention of the subjects would

be distributed. The central items would thus benefit from being in the overall area of

interest, and be more easily recognized in the emotional condition. They would also be

less easily recognized in the neutral condition, on the presumption that the subject's

attention would be more evenly distributed across the space of the scene. This

assumption overlooked the possibility that attention could be placed between the actors

solely, without including the central area between them. In this instance, the central items

would then "fade into the background," and thus be more like the peripheral items with

respect to how much attention they received. The results do show, however, that central









items were more accurately recognized than peripheral items, suggesting that their

placement in the scene did have an impact on how readily the subjects recognized them.

Misinformation. In the present experiment, it can be said that not all

misinformation was "created equal." In some instances, the misinformation simply

offered incorrect information. In other instances, it directly contradicted what was

actually present in the vignettes. As has already been noted, for example, one of the

misinformation items states that there is a bag of chips on the counter in scene 3. In

actuality, there is a teapot there, with no space for a bag. In this instance, then, the

misinformation directly contradicts the facts, which may affect both its likelihood of

being accepted, and the subsequent recognition of the real item. This is different from

other misinformation, which suggest that an item is present when in fact it is not. These

differences in the "type" of misinformation, because they were not accounted for in the

initial design, introduce confounds when efforts are later made to explain differences

between misinformation in different scenes. In future studies, it would be important to

either ensure that all suggested misinformation is of the same kind, or make the

differences in misinformation (i.e. item present/item absent vs. real item/suggested item)

another within-subjects variable.

Conclusions

The present study has sought to find a connection between the concepts of

emotional memory and misinformation acceptance. On their own, these concepts are

complicated enough. Combining them can be a challenge that is at times very intriguing,

and at times very frustrating. Formulating an experiment that does memory justice

inevitably leads to an explosion of variables and a demonically tangled design. When the






76


urge to simplify comes, there is the danger of making the "memory" measured something

that could only occur in the laboratory. Finding the balance between these extremes is

one of the most challenging aspects of researching this area, and one that it is hoped has

been sufficiently met here. It is hoped that the present study has demonstrated that

emotional memory and misinformation acceptance are concepts that deserve to be

considered in concert, and that further study in this area is not only merited, but also

potentially very rewarding.
















REFERENCE LIST


1. Rockwell, R. B. (1995). Insidious deception. Journal ofPsychohistory, 22(3),
312-328.

2. Collins, A. M. and Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of
semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407.428.

3. Jenkins, J. J. (1974, November). Remember that old theory of memory? Well,
forget it! American Psychologist, 785-795.

4. Alba, J. W. and Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin,
93(2), 203-231.

5. Strohmer, P. C., Shivy, V. A., and Chiado, A. L. (1990). Information processing
strategies in counselor hypothesis testing: The role of selective memory and
expectancy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(4), 465-472.

6. Johnson, M. K., and Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological
Review, 88(1), 67-85.

7. Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., Brown, J., and Jasechko, J. (1989). Becoming
famous overnight: Limits on the ability to avoid unconscious influences of the
past. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 56, 326-338.

8. Johnson, M. K., Hastroudi, S., and Lindsay, P. S. (1993). Source monitoring.
Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 3-28.

9. Schooler, J. W., Gerhard, D., and Loftus, E. F. (1986). Qualities of the unreal.
Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, and Cognition, 12(2),
171-181.

10. Dodson, C. S., and Johnson, M. K. (1993). Rate of false source attributions
depends on how questions are asked. American Journal of Psychology, 106(4),
541-557.

11. Loftus, E. F., and Hoffman, H. G. (1989). Misinformation and memory: The
creation of new memories. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General, 118(1),
100-104.










12. Zaragoza, M. S., and Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the
suggestibility of eyewitness memory. Journal ofExperimental Psychology:
Learning. Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 934-945.

13. Belli, R. F. (1989). Influences of misleading postevent information:
Misinformation interference and acceptance. Journal ofExperimental
Psychology: General, 118, 72-85.

14. Donders, K., Schooler, J.W., and Loftus, E. F. (1987). Troubles i/h memory.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Seattle, Wa.

15. Yapko, M. (1994). Suggestions ofAbuse. New York: Simon and Schuster.

16. Sheehan, P. W., Grigg, L, and McCann, T. (1984). Memory distortion following
exposure to false information in hypnosis. Journal ofAbnormal Psychology,
93(3), 259-265.

17. Tellegen, A. (1981). Practicing the two disciplines for relaxation and
enlightenment: Comment on "Role of the feedback signal in electromyographic
biofeedback: The relevance of attention" by Qualls and Sheehan. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 110(2), 217-231.

18. Evans, F. J. (1988). Posthypnotic amnesia: Dissociation of context and content.
In H.M. Pettinati (Ed.) Hypnosis andMemory. New York: Guilford, pp. 157-
192.

19. Johnson, M. K., Foley, N. A., Suengas, A. G., and Raye, C. L. (1988).
Phenomenal characteristics of memories for perceived and imagined
autobiographical events. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: General, 117(4),
371-376.

20. Loftus, E. F., and Ketchan, K. (1994). The Myth ofRepressed Memory. New
York: St. Martin's Press.

21. Whetstone, T. and Cross, M. D. (1998). Control of conscious contents in directed
forgetting and thought suppression. Psyche, 4(16).

22. Ullsperger, M., Mecklinger, A., and Muller, U. (2000). An electrophysiological
test of directed forgetting: The role of retrieval inhibition. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience, 12, 934-940.

23. Whetstone, T., Cross, M., and Whetstone, L. (1996). Inhibition, contextual
segregation, and subject strategies in list method directed forgetting.
Consciousness and Cognition, 5, 395-417.










24. Wilkomirski, B. (1995). Fragments. New York: Shocken Books.

25. Maechler, S. (2001). The Wilkomirski Affair. New York: Shocken Books.

26. Brown, R. and Kulik, J (1977). Flashbulb memories. Cognition, 5, 73-99.

27. Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Flashbulb memories of the assassination attempt on
President Reagan. Cognition, 16, 63-80.

28. Neisser, U. and Harsch, N. (1992). Phantom flashbulbs: False recollections of
hearing the news about Challenger. In E. Winograd & U. Neisser (Eds.), Affect
andAccuracy in Recall: Studies of "Flashbulb Memories (pp. 9-31).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

29. Christianson, S. A. (1989). Flashbulb memories: Special, but not so special.
Memory and Cognition, 17(4), 435-443.

30. Loftus, E. F., and Christianson, S. A. (1991). Remembering emotional events:
The fate of detailed information. Cognition and Emotion, 5(2), 81-108.

31. Burke, A., Heuer, F., and Reisberg, D. (1992). Remembering emotional events.
Memory and Cognition, 20(3), 277-290.

32. Loftus, E. F., (1979). Eyewitness Testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

33. Wurtz, R. H., Goldberg, M. E., and Robinson, D. L. (1982). Brain mechanisms of
visual attention. Scientific American, 246, 124-135.

34. Gold, P., van Buskirk, R., and Haycock, J. (1977). Effects of posttraining
epinephrine injections on retention of avoidance training in mice. Behavioral
Biology, 20, 197-207.

35. McGaugh, J. L. (1995). Emotional activation, neuromodulary systems, and
memory. In D.L. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.

36. Andrews, K. (1990). The effects of emotion on memory accuracy. Unpublished
bachelor's thesis, Reed College, Portland, OR.

37. Loftus, E. F., Feldman, J., and Dashiell, R. (1995). The reality of illusory
memories. In D.L. Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.






80


38. Schacter, D. L. (1995). Memory distortion : History and current status. In D.L.
Schacter (Ed.) Memory Distortion. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

39. Davidson, D., Larson, S. L., Luo, Z., and Burden, M. J. (2000). Interruption and
bizarreness effects in the recall of script-based text. Memory, 8(4), 217-234.
















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Steven Knauts obtained his bachelor's degree in psychology from the University

of Utah, and his master's degree in clinical psychology from the University of Florida.

He interned at Florida State Hospital, a forensic facility in Chattahoochee, Florida, and

received a service award from the Florida Department of Children and Families in 1998.

Mr. Knauts has worked as an evaluator and program therapist for Medlin Treatment

Center since 1999. In that time, he has conducted over 200 evaluations regarding sexual

issues in children, adolescents, and adults, for such agencies as DFACS, the juvenile

courts, the Department of Juvenile Justice, and adult probation. Mr. Knauts has given

presentations at seminars conducted by CASA and Prevent Child Abuse Georgia. He has

been the Assistant Director of the Sexual Deviancy Program at Medlin Treatment Center

since March 2003. Mr. Knauts is a faculty member of Medlin Training Institute, and has

taught in training seminars for the treatment of sex offenders.