The Misinformation Effect

Chrobak, Quin M.; Zaragoza, Maria S.

doi:10.1002/9781118432907.ch2

Cited by 25 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While omitting important crime details, defendants might be more prompted to forgetting actual crucial information of the crime later on, rather than when they come up with a self-generated version of the crime, wherein they distort or introduce new fabricated information surrounding the criminal experience (Van Oorsouw and Giesbrecht, 2008; Mangiulli et al, in press). Germane to this, research has shown that individuals are able to remember and distinguish the content of self-generated information over time (Chrobak and Zaragoza, 2008, 2012; Ackil and Zaragoza, 2011; Mangiulli et al, 2018a). Therefore, a narrowed strategy (i.e., selectively retrieving and omitting just some actual details of the crime) as compared with a broader way of feigning amnesia (i.e., distorting and fabricating new information of the event; Van Oorsouw and Merckelbach, 2006), might lead offenders to forgetting crucial information surrounding the criminal act.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting in the Feigning Amnesia for a Crime Paradigm

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies demonstrated that, when asked to honestly provide information about a mock crime, former feigners performed worse than those who were requested to confess to this event. Thus, feigning amnesia for a mock crime undermined genuine memory for the same experience. In the present study, we examined whether retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) underlies this memory-undermining effect. After watching a mock crime, participants had to feign amnesia or confess to having committed that crime. Feigners were given retrieval practice instructions (i.e., retrieval-practice group) or no further instructions (i.e., control group). Immediately and 1 day later, all participants had to genuinely report what they remembered about the crime. Although simulators in the retrieval-practice group recalled the largest amount of information as a positive consequence of retrieval, the ratio for crucial crime-related details was lower than that exhibited by both simulators who were given no instructions and confessors. These findings suggest that RIF might play a role in forgetting critical information in claims of crime-related amnesia. Theoretical and practical implications will be discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting in the Feigning Amnesia for a Crime Paradigm

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, even though feigning amnesia might mostly lead to omissions (e.g., Christianson and Bylin, 1999 ; van Oorsouw and Merckelbach, 2004 ), it is not surprising that van Oorsouw and Giesbrecht (2008) found that participants initially instructed to minimize culpability for a mock crime increased commission errors over time, as compared with genuinely responding controls. Accordingly, the act of coming up with a personal, self-generated story of the crime (i.e., simulated version of the crime) could enhance errors, but may not affect the number of correct details provided ( Chrobak and Zaragoza, 2008 , 2012 ; van Oorsouw and Giesbrecht, 2008 ; Ackil and Zaragoza, 2011 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feigning Amnesia Moderately Impairs Memory for a Mock Crime Video

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies showed that feigning amnesia for a crime impairs actual memory for the target event. Lack of rehearsal has been proposed as an explanation for this memory-undermining effect of feigning. The aim of the present study was to replicate and extend previous research adopting a mock crime video instead of a narrative story. We showed participants a video of a violent crime. Next, they were requested to imagine that they had committed this offense and to either feign amnesia or confess the crime. A third condition was included: Participants in the delayed test-only control condition did not receive any instruction. On subsequent recall tests, participants in all three conditions were instructed to report as much information as possible about the offense. On the free recall test, feigning amnesia impaired memory for the video clip, but participants who were asked to feign crime-related amnesia outperformed controls. However, no differences between simulators and confessors were found on both correct cued recollection or on distortion and commission rates. We also explored whether inner speech might modulate memory for the crime. Inner speech traits were not found to be related to the simulating amnesia effect. Theoretical and practical implications of our results are discussed.

show abstract

“…Significant research focus has been placed on the misinformation effect, which occurs when a witness is misled via exposure to incorrect post-event information (PEI) and is a powerful source of error (Ayers & Reder, 1998;Loftus, 2005;Zaragoza, Belli, & Payment, 2006). It is commonly found that individuals who are exposed to misleading information are more likely to recall that misinformation later compared with control participants (e.g., Chrobak & Zaragoza, 2012;Lindsay, Allen, Chan, & Dahl, 2004;Loftus, Miller, & Burns, 1978).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Investigating the Impact of Delayed Administration on the Efficacy of the Self-Administered Interview

Paterson

Eijkemans

Kemp

2014

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Self-Administered Interview (SAIÓ) is a recall tool designed to elicit comprehensive initial witness statements while minimising demands on police resources. Previous studies have found that immediate SAIÓ administration increased recall accuracy and even helped inoculate against misinformation. However, no studies have examined the effect of delayed SAIÓ administration on recall quantity and quality. The aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of a delay between the witnessed event and administration of the SAIÓ on recall accuracy. After watching a crime video, the SAIÓ was administered to participants either immediately, after a delay of 24 hr, after 1 week or not at all. Two weeks after watching the video participants were introduced to post-event information (PEI) via an audio discussion, before completing a free recall statement. It was found that delayed administration of the SAIÓ negatively impacted upon recall accuracy and susceptibility to incorrect PEI. The efficacy of the SAIÓ appears to be dependent upon administration within 24 hr of the critical event.

show abstract

The Misinformation Effect

Cited by 25 publications

References 66 publications

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting in the Feigning Amnesia for a Crime Paradigm

Retrieval-Induced Forgetting in the Feigning Amnesia for a Crime Paradigm

Feigning Amnesia Moderately Impairs Memory for a Mock Crime Video

Investigating the Impact of Delayed Administration on the Efficacy of the Self-Administered Interview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About