The Consistency of Occurrences of Memory Distortion Following Hypnotic Induction

Sheehan, Peter W.; Tilden, Jan

doi:10.1080/00207148608406977

Cited by 25 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mike’s erroneous report is analogous to the thousands of erroneous reports after the receipt of misinformation that have been obtained in laboratory studies of the “misinformation effect” conducted in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Germany, Australia, and the Netherlands (Ceci, Ross, & Toglia, 1987a, 1987b; Ceci, Toglia, & Ross, 1988; Chandler, 1989; Geiselman, 1988; Gibling & Davies, 1988; Gudjonsson, 1986; Hammersley & Read, 1986, in press; Kohnken & Brockmann, 1987; Kroll & Ogawa, 1988; Mroll & Timourian, 1986; Lehnert, Robertson, & Black, 1984; Morton, Hammersley, & Bekerian, 1985; Pirolli & Mitterer, 1984; Register & Kihlstrom, 1988; Sheehan, 1988; Sheehan & Tilden, 1986; Smith & Ellsworth, 1987; Wagenaar & Boer, 1987; Zaragoza & Koshmider, 1989; Zaragoza, McCloskey, & Jamis, 1987). This enthusiasm for investigating the misinformation effect has been fueled by an abiding interest on the part of researchers in uncovering the mechanism that produces it.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories.

Loftus¹,

Hoffman²

1989

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

384

212

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Misleading information presented after an event can lead people to erroneous reports of that misinformation. Different process histories can be responsible for the same erroneous report in different people. We argue that the relative proportion of times that the different process histories are responsible for erroneous reporting will depend on the conditions of acquisition, retention, and retrieval of information. Given the conditions typical of most misinformation experiments, it appears that misinformation acceptance plays a major role, memory impairment plays some role, and pure guessing plays little or no role. Moreover, we argue that misinformation acceptance has not received the appreciation that it deserves as a phenomenon worthy of our sustained investigation. It may not tell us anything about impairment of memories, but it does tell us something about the creation of new memories.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories.

Loftus¹,

Hoffman²

1989

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

384

212

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More global changes in confidence—not restricted to responses labeled as guesses during baseline recall—were also evident, and these changes mirrored those discussed earlier. General confidence increases associated with hypnosis and/or hypnotizability have been reported in several studies (Dywan, 1983; Nogrady et al, 1985; Sheehan, Grigg, & McCann, 1984; Sheehan & Tilden, 1983, 1986), and they are often found to be unrelated to the accuracy of recall. It is possible, therefore, that what we describe as a lowering of the report criterion by hypnosis may in fact be accomplished by a general confidence escalation that causes an increase in the number of responses that exceed the report threshold.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Hypnotic hypermnesia: Enhanced memory accessibility or report bias?

Whitehouse¹,

Dinges²,

Orne³

et al. 1988

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory studies of hypnotic hypermnesia have yielded inconsistent evidence of memory enhancement, and the processes responsible for the occasional positive findings have eluded identification. The present experiment assessed delayed recall for filmed material under conditions in which subjects were required to answer all questions, by guessing if necessary. They also rated confidence in the accuracy of each response. After an initial wake-baseline forced-recall test, subjects were randomly assigned to hypnosis or waking conditions for a second forced-recall test. Both groups of subjects recalled additional correct details on the second test, but the magnitude of this hypermnesia was no greater for subjects exposed to the hypnosis treatment. Hypnotized subjects did, however, exhibit a significantly greater increase in confidence for responses designated as "guesses" on the prior waking test-a finding consistent with the view that hypnosis engenders a shift in the subjective criterion for what constitutes a "memory." Implications of these findings for the use of hypnosis in forensic situations are discussed.Anecdotal evidence from clinical and forensic sources suggests that hypnosis can be useful for the restoration of memory. Unfortunately, despite many positive claims, the value of such evidence in establishing the reality of memory enhancement (hypermnesia) by hypnosis is weak at best. A major limitation is that the correspondence between the hypnotically aided recollections and the events originally witnessed by the individual is, as a rule, not subject to independent verification; hence, there is no way to distinguish memories from pseudomemories.Controlled laboratory studies provide the means to determine the accuracy of hypnotic memory reports and to delineate the circumstances under which hypermnesia may occur. Accordingly, research on the topic has proliferated in recent years (for a review, see Orne, Whitehouse, Dinges, & Orne, 1988). These efforts have succeeded in identifying some of the conditions that determine whether hypnosis will increase recall as well as several consequences of the use of hypnosis to enhance

show abstract

“…Results indicate that an appreciable amount of distortion occurs in hypnosis for both recognition and recall memory. There is, however, substantial evidence of inconsistency of effects (see also Sheehan & Tilden, 1986). In terms of recognition memory, there was a misinformation effect for hypnosis for the writing-on-the-jacket stimulus, but the effect was not a general one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypnosis, the timing of its introduction, and acceptance of misleading information.

Sheehan¹,

Statham²

1989

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Allocated independent sets of 16 Ss to a crossed 2 (level of susceptibility: high, low) x 2 (information: misleading, nonmisleading) x 2 (state instruction: hypnosis, walking) design to examine the prediction that hypnosis will facilitate memory distortion when hypnotic instruction precedes the exposure of Ss to incorrect, misleading information. E. F. Loftus's recognition procedures were used to focus on the predicted effect. Free recall was also examined for memory distortion effects. Results indicated the presence of significant memory distortion for both recognition and free-recall memories. The distortion effects accompanying hypnosis, however, were not reliably greater than those accompanying waking instruction. Results are examined in relation to the operation of multiple parameters affecting memory distortion in hypnosis. Pertinent factors include the procedures for testing the effects of distortion and the level of Ss' aptitude for hypnosis.

show abstract

The Consistency of Occurrences of Memory Distortion Following Hypnotic Induction

Cited by 25 publications

References 20 publications

Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories.

Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories.

Hypnotic hypermnesia: Enhanced memory accessibility or report bias?

Hypnosis, the timing of its introduction, and acceptance of misleading information.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About