2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Undoing suggestive influence on memory: The reversibility of the eyewitness misinformation effect

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

4
72
2
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 103 publications
4
72
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…One way to bypass this could be to post-warn participants about earlier misinformation, which could reduce a misinformation effect [55]. This is true also after a misinformation effect has been obtained [56]. However, we argue that the fact that almost all participants in the current experiment “discovered”, or corrected, at least one of the three manipulations encouraged scrutiny, and hence discouraged relying too much on the previously given account.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…One way to bypass this could be to post-warn participants about earlier misinformation, which could reduce a misinformation effect [55]. This is true also after a misinformation effect has been obtained [56]. However, we argue that the fact that almost all participants in the current experiment “discovered”, or corrected, at least one of the three manipulations encouraged scrutiny, and hence discouraged relying too much on the previously given account.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Based on such a heuristic, the participants may subsequently ignore the instruction and provide information based on the preferred source, even if it is the post-event source and even if they have access to the original. Moreover, Oeberst and Blank (2012), mention that (…)in most misinformation studies, participants are led to believe that the post-event information is a veridical account of the original event. If participants assume that the post-event information is correct (even though it is slightly different than the original), they may use it when answering.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Research in this area has produced mixed results, from a total elimination of the misinformation effect (Blank, 1998(Blank, , 2005Lindsay & Johnson, 1989), through reduction (Greene, Flynn, & Loftus, 1982), to a complete lack of the efficacy of warning (Neuschatz, Payne, Lampinen, & Toglia, 2001;Zaragoza & Lane, 1994). Excellent reviews of research concerning the impact of warning on the misinformation effect were presented by Oeberst and Blank (2012) and Blank and Launay (2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%