How you lie affects what you remember.

Vieira, Kathleen; Lane, Sean M.

doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.05.005

Cited by 43 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, we showed that in the False Denial group and for the person questions only, both children and adults were highly inclined to falsely deny that they talked to the experimenter about certain presented details when in fact they did. In a sense, this effect parallels previous experimentation revealing that false denials resulted in worse memory performance (Vieira & Lane, 2013). One might argue that this finding can be explained by source monitoring (Johnson et al, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…That is, deceptive responses such as false denials might require few cognitive operations leading to impoverished memory representations of an event. In the current experiment, this might mean that when participants had to repeatedly falsely deny details during the interview with the experimenter, their memory representation for the interview became impoverished (Vieira & Lane, 2013). The net result could be that participants are less likely to remember what they talked about during the interview at the first session.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Indeed, recently, there has been an attempt to examine the mnemonic effects of (deceptive) false denials. In a recent experiment (Vieira & Lane, 2013), participants viewed several pictures (e.g., apple). Following this, participants were presented with labels of studied and unstudied pictures.…”

Section: False Denialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on earlier work (Vieira & Lane, 2013), we hypothesized that false denials might lead to worse memory performance for details related to the event. The reasoning behind this was two-fold.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Development of Differential Mnemonic Effects of False Denials and Forced Confabulations

Otgaar

Howe

Memon

2014

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation:Otgaar, H., Howe, M. L., Memon, A. & Wang, J. (2014). The development of differential mnemonic effects of false denials and forced confabulations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 32(6), pp. 718-731. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2148 This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent AbstractThe current experiment was designed to assess the mnemonic consequences of false denials and forced confabulations. Children (6-to 8-and 10-to 12-year-olds) and adults viewed a video and their memory and belief about the event were tested. Participants were then divided into three groups. In the Cued Recall condition, participants were asked to answer true-and false-event questions, but could choose not to respond if they did not know the answer. In the Forced Confabulation group, participants received the same set of questions, but were forced to answer all of them. In the False Denial group, participants were instructed to falsely deny in response to each question. One week later, participants received a source memory test, and they had to provide memory and belief ratings once more. Forced confabulations resulted in false memories in the youngest group. Moreover, our analyses showed that repeated false denials led to children and adults to be highly inclined to falsely deny that they had talked to the experimenter about certain presented details when in fact they had done so. Furthermore, false denial and nonbelieved memory rates were more pronounced in younger than in older children and adults.Our results imply that denying experienced events is not a good strategy in an interviewing setting as it adversely affects memory statements about the interview.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: False Denialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Development of Differential Mnemonic Effects of False Denials and Forced Confabulations

Otgaar

Howe

Memon

2014

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Is it possible that Tasha Hopkins' false denial of her abuse potentially adversely affected her memory? The evidence thus far strongly suggests that the answer is yes because false denials have been shown to have an association with poor memory (Vieira & Lane, 2013). In a recent study, participants were shown 12 negative and 12 neutral pictures on a computer screen after which their memory was tested.…”

Section: Psychological Research On Urban Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping with Sexual Abuse

Romeo¹,

Otgaar²,

Landström³

2018

PROUST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General consensus exists in the psychological literature with regard to what constitutes child sexual abuse (CSA) and the negative implications for victims of CSA throughout the course of their lives. Recently, different types of cognitive strategies that victims may use to cope with CSA and the possible effects of these coping strategies on memory have received considerable empirical attention. The first aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the current literature about why, how, and when victims of CSA use the cognitive coping strategies of false denial, disclosure, and recantation to cope with psychological, emotional, and even interpersonal implications of their abuse. Over the years, disclosure is the one strategy that has been researched extensively, whereas research on false denial and recantation has barely just begun. The second aim is to provide a recent overview of the relationship between coping strategies and memory in the context of CSA. Specifically, we will discuss how false denials may have the potential to negatively affect a victim's memory. Finally, we present an argument for the need to undertake research into insufficiently examined coping strategies such as false denial and recantation.

show abstract

Liar, liar: Consistent lying decreases belief in the truth

Polage

2018

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the effects of lying on belief ratings for autobiographical childhood events. Participants lied by trying to convince the experimenter that likely events had not happened and that unlikely events had happened. Participants consistently lied, consistently told the truth, and alternated lying and truth telling across two sessions. Results showed that consistent false assents increased belief in those false events and that consistent false denials decreased belief in those true events.False denials had a larger influence on belief than did false assents. False assents that were told first were more likely to increase in belief than were false assents told in the second session. False denials decreased belief in the true event regardless of when they were told. These results suggest that lying influences confidence ratings both by increasing belief in a lied-about event and by decreasing belief in a true event. created the details. Memory for cognitive operations, such as searching general knowledge stores, manipulating retrieved memories, elaborating, and imagining, suggests that the memory was internally generated rather than actually experienced. If liars remember the effort they put into fabricating their stories, these false stories may sound familiar; nevertheless, they should recognize that their stories were self-generated. The harder it is to fabricate details, the more likely one is to remember doing so (Otgaar & Baker, 2018). If the generation of the memory is easy, the self-generated source may be forgotten, and an inflation effect could occur.Previous research has identified many factors that affect one's ability to source monitor. Lying is presumed to be difficult and uses many cognitive resources (Langleben et al., 2002), so it should result in creating strong memories for the cognitive processes used to generate the lies. However, if a lie is repeated, the amount of cognitive effort used to lie decreases. Walczyk, Mahoney, Doverspike, and Griffith-Ross (2009) noted that response times were faster for prepared lies than for truthful responses because, after the lie had been practiced, the participants were simply delivering a memorized script.Lying becomes easier with repetition and, under some conditions, can be easier than telling the truth (Hu, Chen, & Fu, 2012). Therefore, as lying gets easier, the source-monitoring task becomes more difficult. Source monitoring will also be more difficult if the memory for the source has faded over time. Polage (2012) found that participants who lied during the same session as the posttest were less likely to increase their belief in the lies than participants who had lied in earlier sessions. It was assumed that memory for creating the lies was stronger for participants who had more recently generated the lies, making the source judgments easier.Based on previous research, it was proposed that false assents would increase belief in the false event. Repetition of the lie might increase its retrievability, inhibit the truth, and decrease sou...

show abstract

How you lie affects what you remember.

Cited by 43 publications

References 30 publications

The Development of Differential Mnemonic Effects of False Denials and Forced Confabulations

The Development of Differential Mnemonic Effects of False Denials and Forced Confabulations

Coping with Sexual Abuse

Liar, liar: Consistent lying decreases belief in the truth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About