Toward a Non-memory Misinformation Effect: Accessing the Original Source Does Not Prevent Yielding to Misinformation

Polak, Mateusz; Dukała, Karolina; Szpitalak, Malwina; Polczyk, Romuald

doi:10.1007/s12144-015-9352-8

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with previous studies [28-30, 34, 35, 85-90], the present study found that elderly participants scored lower on memory and intelligence measures and showed a related poor performance on IS variables. These findings confirm the association-well-known in the literature [83, for a review]-between Yield score and cognitive factors, underlining that older people tend to have reduced memory and greater suggestibility than younger persons, due to a cognitive ability and a tendency to become more confused and less certain following misleading questions [18,37,91,92].…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 88%

Interrogative suggestibility in the elderly

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interrogative suggestibility (IS) describes the extent to which an individual behavioral response is affected by messages communicated during formal questioning within a closed social interaction. The present study aimed at improving knowledge about IS in the elderly (aged 65 years and older), in particular about its association with both emotive/affective and cognitive variables. The sample (N = 172) was divided into three groups on the basis of age: late adult (aged 55–64, N = 59), young elderly (aged 65–74, N = 63), and elderly (aged 75 and older, N = 50). Cognitive (i.e., Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test-2, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test), emotive/affective (i.e., Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire) and suggestibility measures (i.e., Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale-2) were administered. In order to identify differences and associations between groups in IS, cognitive and emotive/affective variables, ANOVAs tests and Pearson’s correlations were run. Furthermore, moderation analyses and hierarchical regression were set to determine whether age, cognitive and emotive/affective variables predicted IS components (i.e., Yield and Shift). Finally, machine learning models were developed to highlight the best strategy for classifying elderly subjects with high suggestibility. The results corroborated the significant link between IS and age, showing that elderly participants had the worst performance on all suggestibility indexes. Age was also the most important predictor of both Yield and Shift. Results also confirmed the important role of non-verbal intelligence and memory impairment in explaining IS dimensions, showing that these associations were stronger in young elderly and elderly groups. Implications about interrogative procedures with older adults were discussed.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 88%

Interrogative suggestibility in the elderly

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even in the traditional misinformation paradigm, participants do not always ignore misinformation when they have the time to compared it with the original event. When given the chance to directly compare the original information and the misinformation, participants can still make errors based on the misinformationPolak et al (2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

Neil¹,

Higham²,

Fox³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most misinformation studies, participants are exposed to a to-be-remembered event, and then subsequently given misinformation in textual form. This misinformation impacts on people's ability to accurately report the initial event. In this paper, we present two experiments that explored a different approach to presenting misinformation. In the context of a murder suspect, the to-be-remembered event was audio of a police interview, whilst the misinformation was co-presented as subtitles with some words being different to, and more incriminating than, those that were actually said. We refer to this as concurrent misinformation. In Experiment 1, concurrent misinformation was inappropriately reported in a cued-recall test, and inflated participants' ratings of how incriminating the audio was. Experiment 2 attempted to employ warnings to mitigate the influence of concurrent misinformation. Warnings after the to-be-remembered event had no effect, whilst warnings before the event reduced the effect of concurrent misinformation for a subset of participants. Participants that noticed the discrepancy between the audio and the subtitles were also less likely to judge the audio as incriminating. These results were considered in relation to existing theories underlying the misinformation effect, as well as the implication for the use of audio and text in applied contexts.

show abstract

“…Tousignant et al (1986) showed that experimental manipulations and individual differences which increased the amount of time allocated towards reading misleading postevent misinformationa proxy measure for attentionwas associated with reduced levels of misinformation susceptibility. Tousignant et al (1986) proposed that this elevated attention was linked with increased levels of discrepancy detection, a hypothesis supported by several other investigations in the area (Blank & Launay, 2014;Higham, Blank, & Luna, 2017;Polak, Dukała, Szpitalak, & Polczyk, 2016). Building on Tousignant et al (1986)'s work, Zaragoza and Lane (1998) conducted a study that linked attention and misinformation susceptibility more directly by demonstrating that dividing attention during the misinformation exposure stage led to higher levels of susceptibility to false memory formation.…”

Section: Attention and False Memorymentioning

confidence: 84%

Attentional responses on an auditory oddball predict false memory susceptibility

Kiat

Long

Belli

2018

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention and memory are highly integrated processes. Building on prior behavioral investigations, this study assesses the link between individual differences in low-level neural attentional responding and false memory susceptibility on the misinformation effect, a paradigm in which false event memories are induced via misleading post-event information. Twenty-four subjects completed the misinformation effect paradigm after which high-density (256-channel) EEG data was collected as they engaged in an auditory oddball task. Temporal-spatial decomposition was used to extract two attention-related components from the oddball data, the P3b and Classic Slow Wave. The P3b was utilized as an index of individual differences in salient target attentional responding while the slow wave was adopted as an index of variability in task-level sustained attention. Analyses of these components show a significant negative relationship between slow-wave responses to oddball non-targets and perceptual false memory endorsements, suggestive of a link between individual differences in levels of sustained attention and false memory susceptibility. These findings provide the first demonstrated link between individual differences in basic attentional responses and false memory. These results support prior behavioral work linking attention and false memory and highlight the integration between attentional processes and real-world episodic memory.

show abstract

Toward a Non-memory Misinformation Effect: Accessing the Original Source Does Not Prevent Yielding to Misinformation

Cited by 11 publications

References 30 publications

Interrogative suggestibility in the elderly

Interrogative suggestibility in the elderly

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

Attentional responses on an auditory oddball predict false memory susceptibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About