Will your words become mine? Underlying processes and cowitness intimacy in the memory conformity paradigm.

Abstract

Eyewitness reports become less accurate after exposure to inconsistent information. When such phenomenon of diminishing accuracy occurs among cowitnesses, it is termed memory conformity or the social contagion effect. The present study set out to provide a rigorous test of the underlying mechanisms with particular emphasis on investigating whether genuine false memory is involved. To this end, we conducted an earwitness experiment in which some participants were exposed to discrepant cowitness information and provided their recollections repeatedly and under different conditions. Additionally, we examined the impact of cowitness intimacy by using a random assignment procedure, an aspect that has not been previously studied. With regard to the underlying processes, our findings clearly argue that informational rather than normative influence plays a dominant role. Moreover, highly accurate source attributions indicated that participants were aware of drawing on the recollection of their counterparts. Consequently, we did not obtain any evidence for false memory. With regard to cowitness intimacy, the results were inconsistent and call for further research.

The influence of social, para‐social, and nonsocial misleading post‐event sources on memory performance

“…The effect of social influence was still present, however. Many other studies confirmed that misinformation delivered in a social interaction is effective (e.g., Dalton & Daneman, 2006;Gabbert et al, 2003;Hewitt, Kane, & Garry, 2013;Luus & Wells, 1994;Mudd & Govern, 2004;Numbers, Meade, & Perga, 2014;Oeberst & Seidemann, 2014;Schneider & Watkins, 1996;Wright et al, 2000).…”

The role of time delay in memory conformity

“…A similar problem was investigated by Oeberst and Seidemann (2014). They found that it was mainly informational influence that was responsible for memory conformity.…”

Memory at the Sharp End: The Costs of Remembering With Others in Forensic Contexts

“…Normative influence is most often observed when participants are tested together and responses are given publicly rather than privately and when costs of disagreeing are high (see Allan & Gabbert, ; Schneider & Watkins, ; Shaw, Garven, & Wood, ). For example, memory conformity effects are typically larger when witnesses know each other, with participants more likely to report information acquired from a friend or romantic partner than from a stranger (French, Garry, & Mori, ; Hope, Ost, Gabbert, Healey, & Lenton, ; but see Oeberst & Seidemann, ), and from an in‐group than from an out‐group partner (Andrews & Rapp, ). Similarly, Wheeler, Allan, Tsivilis, Martin, and Gabbert () observed an enhanced conformity effect towards “similar others” on a collaborative memory task.…”