The “memory” misinformation effect may not be caused by memory failures: Exploring memory states of misinformed subjects

Polczyk, Romuald

doi:10.1515/ppb-2017-0045

Cited by 19 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS, Gudjonsson, 1997; Polish adaptation: Wilk, 2004) was designed to measure compliance, defined as the tendency to conform to requests made by others, particularly people in authority, in order to please them or to avoid conflict and confrontation. It consists of 20 statements answered true or false, for example, “I give in easily when I am pressured.” The reliability of this tool in previous study done so far was .80 (Polczyk, 2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…This is a 34‐item tool designed to assess three possible responses to social influence pressure: independence (Principled Autonomy), conformity/compliance (Social Adaptability) and anticonformity (Social Friction) (Bobier, 2002; polish adaptation: Polczyk, 2007). The questions are answered on a five‐point Likert scale, from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” Cronbach's alphas for the three dimensions in previous study done so far with this tool were .80, .82 and .67, respectively (Polczyk, 2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 83%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reinforced self‐affirmation as a method for reducing eyewitness memory conformity: An experimental examination using a modified MORI technique

Kękuś

Chylińska

Szpitalak

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The manuscript describes an experimental investigation of one possible technique that may reduce memory conformity: the reinforced self‐affirmation procedure (RSA). While previous studies have already demonstrated the RSA's effectiveness in reducing other memory distortions (e.g., the misinformation effect and interrogative suggestibility), this has not been tested in the context of the co‐witness memory conformity effect. To this end, we will utilize the well‐known MORI technique to study co‐witness memory conformity under well‐controlled experimental conditions. While viewing different versions of the same movie, pairs of participants will sit beside each other, believing that they are viewing the same version. Next, they will answer questions collaboratively, which will guide them to discuss conflicting details. Finally, participants will take a recognition test individually, but in the experimental condition, this will be proceeded by the RSA procedure, which is expected to be an effective way of eliminating the effect of memory conformity. If reinforcing one's own confidence reduces the plausible memory conformity effect, it may be then argued that the mechanism underlying this phenomenon is the participants' lack of confidence relating to quality of their memory. As argued in the present paper, these results will open up a set of interesting questions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Reinforced self‐affirmation as a method for reducing eyewitness memory conformity: An experimental examination using a modified MORI technique

Kękuś

Chylińska

Szpitalak

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the hypothesis concerning motivational factors could be analyzed via a mediation analysis in which the training is the predictor, the motivation to show a good memory is the mediator and yielding to misinformation is the outcome. If it is true that training about memory promotes discrepancy detection, this could be detected by existing methods of detecting participants aware of these discrepancies (Blank, 1998;Polczyk, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It consists of a three-stage misinformation procedure which refers directly to the content of the memory report, not to the ability to discriminate between sources of information, as in the study by Lane et al (2007). This is important because a person may be able to recognize sources of information and be aware of the discrepancies between the original and postevent misinformation and still give answers consistent with the latter (Blank, 1998;Polczyk, 2007Polczyk, , 2017. Also, in the present research the training consisted solely of providing participants with information about memory, ormore preciselyabout possible weaknesses and malfunctions of memory.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After training, participants may start to inspect the content of their memories more closely; this may increase the chance of detecting discrepancies between the original and postevent materials. Although detecting discrepancies by no means prevents the misinformation effect from happening (Blank, 1998;Polczyk, 2007Polczyk, , 2017, it nevertheless reduces it (Tousignant, Hall, & Loftus, 1986). It is even possible that some motivational processes take place as some people may feel challenged in a way when they learn that memory is generally weak, therefore they may want to show that their own memory is good.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Memory Training as a Method for Reducing the Misinformation Effect

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two experiments presented in this study investigate the impact of memory training on the misinformation effect. This effect is particularly important in the forensic context as exposing a witness to misinformation may adversely affect the content of their testimony. During the training, the participants were acquainted with seven (Experiment 1) or six (Experiment 2) types of memory errors. It was expected that knowledge of the unreliability of human memory would reduce the misinformation effect and therefore improve the quality of testimony. These hypotheses were confirmed in both experiments. The efficacy of both the complete and reduced training courses was not statistically different. Additionally, in Experiment 1 the effectiveness of warning against misinformation was replicated: respondents warned about misinformation were more resistant to it than those not warned. The tainted truth effect was also present: people warned against non-existent misinformation had lower correctness in the memory test than non-warned ones. Finally, immediate recall of the content of the original information had no impact on the misinformation effect.

show abstract

Is your memory better than mine? Investigating the mechanisms and determinants of the memory conformity effect using a modified MORI technique

Kękuś

Polczyk

Itô

et al. 2021

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The paper presents the memory conformity effect phenomenon, which assumes that information about the same event that a witness acquires from another witness (misinformation) is incorporated into the first witness' memory of the event (original information). The study has two goals: (1) to verify the existence of people with the memory conformity effect who are aware of discrepancy between original information and misinformation; (2) to determine why they choose misinformation despite the correctness of their own memories. In addition, we examine the relationship between susceptibility to social influence, compliance, suggestibility and memory conformity. Importantly, these relationships will be analyzed in interaction with awareness of discrepancy, which has not yet been examined in previous studies. More precisely, we will apply a new research approach to further investigate the causes of memory conformity. To this end, we will specifically analyze participants' awareness of discrepancies between the details of an observed event and the misinformation presented by another witness. In order to examine the memory conformity effect, we will use the MORI technique, which ensures high ecological validity. The two members of each pair of participants will sit next to each other and each will not be aware that the other watched a different version of the same event. Then, the participants will answer related questions and discuss the contradictory details. Subsequently, the subjects will complete an individual recognition test. Importantly, after the main part of the study (i.e., the MORI procedure), participants will be explicitly informed about the different versions of the event and they will be asked to complete awareness of discrepancy questionnaires. This will allow us to further examine the driving forces underlying the memory conformity effect. We expect the study's results to expand the knowledge on the mechanisms and determinants of the strength of the memory conformity effect and to contribute to the development of effective techniques that reduce the effect of this phenomenon.

show abstract

The “memory” misinformation effect may not be caused by memory failures: Exploring memory states of misinformed subjects

Cited by 19 publications

References 45 publications

Reinforced self‐affirmation as a method for reducing eyewitness memory conformity: An experimental examination using a modified MORI technique

Reinforced self‐affirmation as a method for reducing eyewitness memory conformity: An experimental examination using a modified MORI technique

Memory Training as a Method for Reducing the Misinformation Effect

Is your memory better than mine? Investigating the mechanisms and determinants of the memory conformity effect using a modified MORI technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About