Social demand characteristics in children's and adults' eyewitness memory and suggestibility: the effect of different interviewers on free recall and recognition

Bjorklund, David F.; Cassel, William S.; Bjorklund, Barbara R.; Brown, Rhonda Douglas; Park, Cynthia L.; Ernst, Katrin; Owen, Felicia A.

doi:10.1002/1099-0720(200009)14:5<421::aid-acp659>3.0.co;2-4

Cited by 64 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most importantly, the RES effect persisted for peripheral items even when both the initial and final tests were administered in a free recall format. Similar to previous reports, the free recall format is highly resistant to the influence of misinformation (Bjorklund et al, 1998(Bjorklund et al, , 2000, such that the non-tested participants recalled very little of the peripheral misinformation they encountered (M = .10). Remarkably, initial testing nearly doubled false recall probability for these items (M = .19), t(118) = 2.57, d = .47, p < .02 (refer to Figure 3).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Further, despite the vast literature on eyewitness suggestibility, a surprisingly small number of studies have examined the influence of misinformation on free recall performance. Of the few studies that used free recall as the final test, some have failed to demonstrate any discernable misinformation effect (Bjorklund, Bjorklund, Brown, & Cassel, 1998;Bjorklund, Cassell, Bjorklund, et al, 2000). Therefore, whether initial testing can produce confidently held false memories for misinformation that persist in a free recall final test remains to be seen (cf., Roediger & McDermott, 1995).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Retrieval enhances eyewitness suggestibility to misinformation in free and cued recall.

Wilford¹,

Chan²,

Tuhn³

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immediately recalling a witnessed event can increase people's susceptibility to later postevent misinformation. But this retrieval-enhanced suggestibility (RES) effect has been shown only when the initial recall test included specific questions that reappeared on the final test. Moreover, it is unclear whether this phenomenon is affected by the centrality of event details. These limitations make it difficult to generalize RES to criminal investigations, which often begin with free recall prior to more specific queries from legal officials and attorneys. In 3 experiments, we examined the influence of test formats (free recall vs. cued recall) and centrality of event details (central vs. peripheral) on RES. In Experiment 1, both the initial and final tests were cued recall. In Experiment 2, the initial test was free recall and the final test was cued recall. In Experiment 3, both the initial and final tests were free recall. Initial testing increased misinformation reporting on the final test for peripheral details in all experiments, but the effect was significant for central details only after aggregating the data from all 3 experiments. These results show that initial free recall can produce RES, and more broadly, that free recall can potentiate subsequent learning of complex prose materials. Immediately recalling a witnessed event can increase people's susceptibility to later post-

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrieval enhances eyewitness suggestibility to misinformation in free and cued recall.

Wilford¹,

Chan²,

Tuhn³

2014

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some cases, all the interviews with a child were conducted by the same interviewer, but in other cases they were conducted by different interviewers and from different professional groups. The limited research suggests that children are more accurate in second interviews if they are interviewed by the same person as in the first interview (Bjorklund et al, 2000). However, a comparison was not possible in the present study due to the small sample size.…”

Section: Limitations and Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 77%

Dynamics of Repeated Interviews with Children

Waterhouse

Ridley

Bull

et al. 2016

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns regarding repeat interviews with child witnesses include greater use of suggestive questions in later interviews due to bias, and that children may appear inconsistent and, therefore, be judged as less reliable in court. UK transcripts of first and second interviews with 21 child victims/witnesses (conducted by qualified interviewers) were coded for question types and child responses. Interviewers were consistent in their proportional use of question types across interviews. Furthermore, children were as informative in second interviews as in first, mostly providing new details consistent with their prior recall. Despite the apparent lack of training in conducting repeated interviews, no negative effects were found; second interviews appeared to be conducted as well as initial interviews and they provided new details without many contradictions. It is suggested that when a child's testimony is paramount for an investigation, a well-conducted supplementary interview may be an effective way of gaining further investigative leads.

show abstract

“…For children questioned repeatedly, the same interviewer conducted each interview to eliminate effects of changing interviewers on performance (e.g., Bjorklund et al, 2000;Quas & Schaaf, 2002). During the play event and interviews, the presence of male research assistants (RAs) was prohibited in the laboratory, and no men interacted with the children.…”

Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Quas

Malloy

Melinder

et al. 2007

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on children's memory and suggestibility. Three-and 5-year-olds were singly or repeatedly interviewed about a play event by a highly biased or control interviewer. Children interviewed once by the biased interviewer after a long delay made the most errors. Children interviewed repeatedly, regardless of interviewer bias, were more accurate and less likely to falsely claim that they played with a man. In free recall, among children questioned once after a long delay by the biased interviewer, 5-year-olds were more likely than were 3-year-olds to claim falsely that they played with a man. However, in response to direct questions, 3-year-olds were more easily manipulated into implying that they played with him. Findings suggest that interviewer bias is particularly problematic when children's memory has weakened. In contrast, repeated interviews that occur a short time after a to-be-remembered event do not necessarily increase children's errors, even when interviews include misleading questions and interviewer bias. Implications for developmental differences in memory and suggestibility are discussed. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptAlthough it is well accepted that memories are not exact replicas of prior experiences but instead are reconstructions (Loftus, 1979), the nature of these reconstructions and the effects of developmental and contextual influences on them remain debated. One noteworthy debate has focused on the effects of repeated interviews on children's memory and suggestibility. In particular, concerns have been raised that the more often a child is interviewed, the more often misinformation might be presented-intentionally or inadvertently-leading to increased inaccuracy over time. Moreover, repeated demands for a child to retrieve information from memory may increase confabulations due to social pressure. Despite these concerns, studies of children's memory for experienced events generally suggest that repeated interviews can improve performance by facilitating recall and reducing forgetting (e.g., Howe, Courage, & Bryant-Brown, 1993;Peterson, 1999). Yet, in a second line of research, specifically when children are suggestively questioned about false events, adverse effects of repeated interviews appear to emerge (e.g., Bruck, Ceci, & Hembrooke, 2002;Leichtman & Ceci, 1995).A simple explanation for the different patterns of results is that repeated interviews benefit memory when the to-be-remembered event is true and distort memory when the to-beremembered event is false. However, a number of other factors likely contribute to the evident reduction in accuracy when children are repeatedly interviewed about fictitious events, making the simple explanation premature. For instance, studies concerning children's false event reports following repeated interviews often began with an interviewer explicitly stating that the false events occurred...

show abstract

Social demand characteristics in children's and adults' eyewitness memory and suggestibility: the effect of different interviewers on free recall and recognition

Cited by 64 publications

References 19 publications

Retrieval enhances eyewitness suggestibility to misinformation in free and cued recall.

Retrieval enhances eyewitness suggestibility to misinformation in free and cued recall.

Dynamics of Repeated Interviews with Children

Developmental differences in the effects of repeated interviews and interviewer bias on young children's event memory and false reports.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About