When does warning help and when does it harm? The impact of warning on eyewitness testimony
Keywords:
misinformation effect; warning; tainted truth effect; eyewitness testimony; forensic psychology
Abstract
The presented studies are concerned with the misinformation effect in the context of eyewitness testimony. The main purpose of the experiments was to present the possible consequences (positive ones and negative ones) of warning participants about inconsistencies between original and postevent materials to the quality of memory report. Another aim of the studies was to include an additional stage in the typical procedure of researching misinformation effect: the presentation of an additional postevent material. In both experiments, after the original material was shown to them, participants were exposed to two postevent materials. One of the materials correctly repeated the information from the original material or contained neutral information, while the other one included some misleading information. The two experiments differed in the sequence of the exposition of postevent materials. In the first study, misinformation manipulation was used in the first material. In the second study, the first postevent material was neutral or contained information correctly repeated from the original material. As expected, in Experiment 1 the tainted truth effect was observed, whereas in Experiment 2 warning eliminated the misinformation effect.
References
Anastasi, J. S., Rhodes, M. G., Burns, M. C. (2000). Distinguishing between memory illusions and actual memories using phenomenological measurements and explicit warnings. American Journal of Psychology, 113, 1-26.
Apsler, R., Sears, D. O. (1968). Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 162-166.
Bekerian, D. A., Bowers, J. N. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we misled? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1, 139-145.
Blank, H. (1998). Memory states and memory tasks: An integrative framework for eyewitness memory and suggestibility. Memory, 6, 481-529.
Campbell, J. M., Edwards, M. S., Horswill, M. S., Helman, S. (2007). Effects of contextual cues in recall and recognition memory: The misinformation effect reconsidered. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 485-498.
Chambers, K. L., Zaragoza, M. S. (2001). Intended and unintended effects of explicit warnings on eyewitness suggestibility: Evidence from source identification tests. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1120-1129.
Chandler, C. C. (1991). How memory for an event is influenced by related events: Interference in modified recognition tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 115-125.
Christiaansen, R. E., Ochalek, K. (1983). Editing misleading information from memory: Evidence for the coexistence of original and postevent information. Memory & Cognition, 11, 467-475.
Cohen, H. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hiilsdale–New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Echterhoff, G., Groll, S., Hirst, W. (2007). Tainted truth: Overcorrection for misinformation influence on eyewitness memory. Social Cognition, 25, 367-409.
Echterhoff, G., Hirst, W., Hussy, W. (2005). How eyewitness resist misinformation: Social postwarnings and the monitoring of memory characteristics. Memory & Cognition, 33, 770-782.
Farrar, M. J., Goodman, G. S. (1992). Developmental changes in event memory. Child Development, 63, 173-187.
Greene, E., Flynn, M. B., Loftus, E. F. (1982). Inducing resistance to misleading information. Journal of Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 207-219.
Lindsay, D. S., Johnson, M. K. (1989). The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source. Memory & Cognition, 17, 349-358.
Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560-572.
Loftus, E. F. (1979). Reactions to blatantly contradictory information. Memory & Cognition, 5, 368-374.
Loftus, E. F. (2005). Planting misinformation in the human mind: 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learning & Memory, 12, 361-366.
Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 19-31.
McCabe, D. P., Smith, A. D. (2002). The effect of warnings on false memories in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1065-1077.
McCloskey, M., Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairement hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1-16.
Metcalfe, J. (1990). Composite holographic associative recall model (CHARM) and blended memories in eyewitness testimony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 145-160.
Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G., Lampinen, J. M., Toglia, M. P. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of warnings and the phenomenological characteristics of false memories. Memory, 9, 53-71.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847-855.
Pezdek, K. (1977). Cross-modality semantic integration of sentence and picture memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 515-524.
Pezdek, K., Roe, Ch. (1995). The effect of memory trace strength on suggestibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60, 116-128.
Polczyk, R. (2007). Mechanizmy efektu dezinformacji w kontekście zeznań świadka naocznego. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Reyna, V. F., Brainerd, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 1-75.
Szpitalak, M. (2012). Rola motywów autoregulacyjnych w mechanizmach zniekształceń pamięciowych uwarunkowanych efektem dezinformacji (mps pracy doktorskiej, Uniwersytet Jagielloński).
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2010). Warning against warnings: Alerted subjects may perform worse. Misinformation, involvement and warning as determinants of eyewitness testimony. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 41, 105-112.
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2011a). Zniekształcenia zeznań świadka naocznego – mechanizmy pamięciowe i niepamięciowe. Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych, 85, 40-49.
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2011b). Czy ostrzeżenie może szkodzić? Wpływ ostrzeżenia na jakość zaznania świadka. Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych, 86, 140-150.
Tousignant, J. P., Hall, D., Loftus, E. F. (1986). Discrepancy detection and vulnerability to misleading postevent information. Memory and Cognition, 14, 329-338.
Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., Balota, D. A. (2004). Attempting to avoid false memories in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott paradigm: Assessing the combined influence of practice and warnings in young and old adults. Memory & Cognition, 32, 135-141.
Westerberg, C. E., Marsolek, C. J. (2006). Do instructional warnings reduce false recognition? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 97-114.
Wright, D. B. (1993). Misinformation and warnings in eyewitness testimony: A new testing procedure to differentiate explanations. Memory, 1, 153-166.
Wright, D. B., Loftus, E. (1998). How misinformation alters Memories. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71, 155-164.
Zaragoza, M. S., Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the suggestibility of eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 934-945.
Apsler, R., Sears, D. O. (1968). Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 162-166.
Bekerian, D. A., Bowers, J. N. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we misled? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1, 139-145.
Blank, H. (1998). Memory states and memory tasks: An integrative framework for eyewitness memory and suggestibility. Memory, 6, 481-529.
Campbell, J. M., Edwards, M. S., Horswill, M. S., Helman, S. (2007). Effects of contextual cues in recall and recognition memory: The misinformation effect reconsidered. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 485-498.
Chambers, K. L., Zaragoza, M. S. (2001). Intended and unintended effects of explicit warnings on eyewitness suggestibility: Evidence from source identification tests. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1120-1129.
Chandler, C. C. (1991). How memory for an event is influenced by related events: Interference in modified recognition tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 115-125.
Christiaansen, R. E., Ochalek, K. (1983). Editing misleading information from memory: Evidence for the coexistence of original and postevent information. Memory & Cognition, 11, 467-475.
Cohen, H. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hiilsdale–New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Echterhoff, G., Groll, S., Hirst, W. (2007). Tainted truth: Overcorrection for misinformation influence on eyewitness memory. Social Cognition, 25, 367-409.
Echterhoff, G., Hirst, W., Hussy, W. (2005). How eyewitness resist misinformation: Social postwarnings and the monitoring of memory characteristics. Memory & Cognition, 33, 770-782.
Farrar, M. J., Goodman, G. S. (1992). Developmental changes in event memory. Child Development, 63, 173-187.
Greene, E., Flynn, M. B., Loftus, E. F. (1982). Inducing resistance to misleading information. Journal of Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 207-219.
Lindsay, D. S., Johnson, M. K. (1989). The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source. Memory & Cognition, 17, 349-358.
Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560-572.
Loftus, E. F. (1979). Reactions to blatantly contradictory information. Memory & Cognition, 5, 368-374.
Loftus, E. F. (2005). Planting misinformation in the human mind: 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory. Learning & Memory, 12, 361-366.
Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 19-31.
McCabe, D. P., Smith, A. D. (2002). The effect of warnings on false memories in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1065-1077.
McCloskey, M., Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairement hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1-16.
Metcalfe, J. (1990). Composite holographic associative recall model (CHARM) and blended memories in eyewitness testimony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 145-160.
Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G., Lampinen, J. M., Toglia, M. P. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of warnings and the phenomenological characteristics of false memories. Memory, 9, 53-71.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847-855.
Pezdek, K. (1977). Cross-modality semantic integration of sentence and picture memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 515-524.
Pezdek, K., Roe, Ch. (1995). The effect of memory trace strength on suggestibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60, 116-128.
Polczyk, R. (2007). Mechanizmy efektu dezinformacji w kontekście zeznań świadka naocznego. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Reyna, V. F., Brainerd, C. J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 1-75.
Szpitalak, M. (2012). Rola motywów autoregulacyjnych w mechanizmach zniekształceń pamięciowych uwarunkowanych efektem dezinformacji (mps pracy doktorskiej, Uniwersytet Jagielloński).
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2010). Warning against warnings: Alerted subjects may perform worse. Misinformation, involvement and warning as determinants of eyewitness testimony. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 41, 105-112.
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2011a). Zniekształcenia zeznań świadka naocznego – mechanizmy pamięciowe i niepamięciowe. Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych, 85, 40-49.
Szpitalak, M., Polczyk, R. (2011b). Czy ostrzeżenie może szkodzić? Wpływ ostrzeżenia na jakość zaznania świadka. Z Zagadnień Nauk Sądowych, 86, 140-150.
Tousignant, J. P., Hall, D., Loftus, E. F. (1986). Discrepancy detection and vulnerability to misleading postevent information. Memory and Cognition, 14, 329-338.
Watson, J. M., McDermott, K. B., Balota, D. A. (2004). Attempting to avoid false memories in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott paradigm: Assessing the combined influence of practice and warnings in young and old adults. Memory & Cognition, 32, 135-141.
Westerberg, C. E., Marsolek, C. J. (2006). Do instructional warnings reduce false recognition? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 97-114.
Wright, D. B. (1993). Misinformation and warnings in eyewitness testimony: A new testing procedure to differentiate explanations. Memory, 1, 153-166.
Wright, D. B., Loftus, E. (1998). How misinformation alters Memories. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71, 155-164.
Zaragoza, M. S., Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the suggestibility of eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 934-945.
Published
2019-03-28
Issue
Section
Articles
Copyright (c) 2012 Roczniki Psychologiczne
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
