Memory Strength Affects Reporting of Misinformation

Marche, Tammy A.

doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2489

Cited by 85 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results also support those of previous behavioral investigations of the misinformation effect in which stronger memory for the original event, usually manipulated by repeating presentation of the original event, resulted in greater resistance to misinformation (Marche, 1999;Pezdek & Roe, 1995;Sutherland & Hayne, 2001). In addition, behavioral and neuroimaging studies have found that during memory retrieval, true memories tend to be associated with greater ratings and activation of sensory details, as predicted by the reality-monitoring framework (Johnson & Raye, 1981; see also .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Comparison of neural activity that leads to true memories, false memories, and forgetting: An fMRI study of the misinformation effect

Baym

Gonsalves

2010

Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

False memories can occur when people are exposed to misinformation about a past event. Of interest here are the neural mechanisms of this type of memory failure. In the present study, participants viewed photographic vignettes of common activities during an original event phase (OEP), while we monitored their brain activity using f MRI. Later, in a misinformation phase, participants viewed sentences describing the studied photographs, some of which contained information conflicting with that depicted in the photographs. One day later, participants returned for a surprise item memory recognition test for the content of the photographs. Results showed reliable creation of false memories, in that participants reported information that had been presented in the verbal misinformation but not in the photographs. Several regions were more active during the OEP for later accurate memory than for forgetting, but they were also more active for later false memories, indicating that false memories in this paradigm are not simply caused by failure to encode the original event. There was greater activation in the ventral visual stream for subsequent true memories than for subsequent false memories, however, suggesting that differences in encoding may contribute to later susceptibility to misinformation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Comparison of neural activity that leads to true memories, false memories, and forgetting: An fMRI study of the misinformation effect

Baym

Gonsalves

2010

Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results suggest that previous findings that good memory for the details of an event is associated with low levels of suggestibility (e.g. Marche, 1999; a Proportions represent the percentage of studies containing significant correlations in the predicted direction. The percentage of studies containing significant correlations in the nonpredicted direction is presented in parentheses.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

From the archive: ‘Individual differences in children's suggestibility: A review and synthesis’ by M. Bruck & L. Melnyk (2004). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 947–996 with commentary

2011

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviewed research on the association of children's suggestibility with cognitive, psycho-social and demographic variables. It is impressive, both in scope and depth of analysis. The results of more than 500 measures derived from 69 published and unpublished studies were synthesized with several levels of analysis. Discussion focused on potential mechanisms that underlie suggestibility effects, the interactions between variables and how fi ndings differ depending upon the component of suggestibility examined. Bruck and Melnyk concluded that apart from intellectual status, a strong case could not be made for any other variable being critical. Methodological and conceptual limitations were discussed in an effort to establish how these might have contributed to non-signifi cant results and could be addressed in future research. Johns Hopkins University, USA 2 King's University College at the University of Western Ontario, Canada SUMMARY Over the last decade, there has been a significant growth in the study of individual differences factors predicting children's suggestibility. In this paper, we synthesize the results of 69 studies examining the relationship of demographic factors (socioeconomic status and gender), cognitive factors (intelligence, language, memory, theory of mind, executive functioning, behavioural ratings of distractibility, and creativity), and psycho-social factors (social engagement, self concept/selfefficacy, stress/emotional arousal/state anxiety, maternal attachment styles, parent-child relationship, parenting styles, temperament, and mental health) and children's suggestibility. We found that for cognitive factors, language ability and creativity were fairly consistently related to suggestibility. The highest correlations for psycho-social factors and suggestibility were obtained for measures of self-concept/self-efficacy, maternal attachment, and the parent-child relationship. Implications for future research and mechanisms underlying children's suggestibility are discussed. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. In 1997, we wrote a review paper on individual differences in children's suggestibility (Bruck, Ceci, & Melnyk, 1997). Most of the paper focused on external (interviewing) factors that increased or decreased suggestibility specifically among preschoolers. A small section of that paper reviewed the existing literature on 'internal factors' that included cognitive and psycho-social factors. At that writing, there were very few empirical studies examining individual differences in suggestibility; our paper only included 20 references of such studies and most of these focused on the relationship of suggestibility with intelligence and memory. Seven years later, the number of studies in this area has greatly increased and we update our review of the literature. In this paper, we focus on the association of children's suggestibility with cognitive, psycho-social, and to a lesser degree, demographic variables.Studies of individual difference are important for theoretical a...

show abstract

“…As discussed above, however, children who were confused about the origin of actions evidenced better learning of a task (Ratner et al, 2000), children with an understanding of mind and good memories of multiple sources committed source errors (Welch-Ross, 1999b), and children who confused memories of multiple incidents rarely reported entirely false information (Powell et al, 1999). In other words, Although exposure to non-target sources (e.g., post-event discussions, interviews) can sometimes improve memories and source monitoring of a target event through reinstatement (Marche, 1999;Principe, Ornstein, Baker-Ward, & Gordon, 2000;Roberts, Lamb, & Sternberg, 1999;Warren & Lane, 1995), some errors in children's testimony are the result of confusing target information and suggested information (e.g., Bruck et al, 2000;Poole & Lindsay, 2001a).…”

Section: Expectations Of Child Witnessesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

Roberts

2002

Developmental Review

100

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying the sources of memories (e.g., who carried out an action, whether an event happened or was suggested, when an instance of a repeated event occurred) is an important skill in providing accurate accounts of events in forensic investigations. Sensitivity to the nature and development of children's source-monitoring skills can inform interviewing practices. Five perspectives addressing alternate aspects of the development of children's source monitoring are outlined (source-monitoring theory, fuzzy-trace theory, schema theory, the person-based perspective, and the mental-state reasoning model). Six main areas of empirical research stemming from these theories are then discussed with emphasis on how the findings relate to the forensic arena: The similarity of sources, the identity of the agent, prospective processing, the relation of source monitoring to other cognitive skills, metacognitive understanding, and the stringency of source-monitoring decisions. The research reviewed is used to address two main applications to forensic investigations: (a) expectations of child witnesses, and (b) interviewing protocols.Children's ability to distinguish 3 Children's Ability To Distinguish Between Memories From Multiple Sources: Implications For The Quality And Accuracy Of Eyewitness StatementsOne of the most important investigative tools in forensics is the interview. Interviewing victims of and witnesses to crimes is especially important in investigations where there is little physical evidence and the main evidence therefore comes from eyewitness accounts. Concern has been raised about the reliability of eyewitness testimony, however, because many factors can have adverse effects on the length, quality, and accuracy of testimony. In addition to providing an accurate account of exactly what transpired during a crime, witnesses must also accurately identify the sources or origins of event details. Examples include identifying the source of an action (e.g., Who did it, Perpetrator A or Perpetrator B?), the source of a voice (e.g., Who said it, me or the perpetrator?), the reality status of a past event (e.g., Did it really happen or did I just dream it? Did I really see it happen or did I just hear about it?), and identifying one incident from a series of incidents (e.g., Did he touch me the first time he babysat or the last time he babysat? Did he touch me in the bedroom or the bathroom?). In all of these examples, child victims and witnesses must retrieve their memories and identify the precise source of those memories. Research on the development of such "source monitoring" (Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993; can provide us with accurate expectations of child witnesses' capabilities, contribute to the development of appropriate interviewing protocols, and shed light on interviewers' judgments of child witnesses' credibility.There are numerous source distinctions relevant to the forensic arena (see Table 1 for examples). Witnesses need to monitor various sources contained in a target incident (i.e., t...

show abstract

Memory Strength Affects Reporting of Misinformation

Cited by 85 publications

References 25 publications

Comparison of neural activity that leads to true memories, false memories, and forgetting: An fMRI study of the misinformation effect

Comparison of neural activity that leads to true memories, false memories, and forgetting: An fMRI study of the misinformation effect

From the archive: ‘Individual differences in children's suggestibility: A review and synthesis’ by M. Bruck & L. Melnyk (2004). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 947–996 with commentary

Children’s ability to distinguish between memories from multiple sources: Implications for the quality and accuracy of eyewitness statements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About