User:AFL2021/Misinformation effect

This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution. If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. Bibliography sandbox

Article Draft

Lead

The misinformation effect occurs when a person's recall of episodic memories becomes less accurate because of post-event information.^[1] The misinformation effect has been studied extensively since the mid-1970s. Elizabeth Loftus is one of the most influential researchers in the field. It

The misinformation effect is an example of retroactive interference which occurs when information presented later interferes with the ability to retain previously encoded information. Essentially, the new information that a person receives works backward in time to distort memory of the original event.^[2] One mechanism through which the misinformation effect occurs is source misattribution, in which the false information given after the even becomes incorporated into people's memory of the actual event.^[3] The misinformation effect also appears to stem from memory impairment, meaning that post-event misinformation makes it harder for people to remember the event.^[3] It reflects two of the cardinal sins of memory: suggestibility, the influence of others' expectations on our memory; and misattribution, information attributed to an incorrect source.

Research on the misinformation effect has uncovered concerns about the permanence and reliability of memory.^[4] Understanding the misinformation effect is also important given its implications for the accuracy of eyewitness testimony, as there are many chances for misinformation to be incorporated into witnesses' memories through conversations with other witnesses, police questioning, and court appearances.^[5][3]

Susceptibility

It is important to note that not everyone is equally susceptible to the misinformation effect. Individual traits and qualities can either increase or decrease one's susceptibility to recalling misinformation.^[6] Such traits and qualities include age, working memory capacity, personality traits and imagery abilities.

Age

Several studies have focused on the influence of the misinformation effect on various age groups.^[7] Young children — especially pre-school-aged children — are more susceptible than older children and adults to the misinformation effect.^[8][7][9] Young children are particularly susceptible to this effect as it relates to peripheral memories and information, as some evidence suggests that the misinformation effect is stronger on an ancillary, existent memory than on a new, purely fabricated memory. This effect is redoubled if its source is in the form of a narrative rather than a question.^[10] Children are also more likely to accept misinformation when it is presented in specific questions rather than in open-ended questions.^[8]

Additionally, there are different perspectives regarding the vulnerability of elderly adults to the misinformation effect. Some evidence suggests that elderly adults are more susceptible to the misinformation effect than younger adults.^[9][7][11] Contrary to this perspective, however, other studies hold that older adults may make fewer mistakes when it comes to the misinformation effect than younger ones, depending on the type of question being asked and the skillsets required in the recall.^[12] This contrasting perspective holds that the defining factor when it comes to age, at least in adults, depends largely on cognitive capacity, and the cognitive deterioration that commonly accompanies age to be the typical cause of the typically observed decline.^[12] Additionally, there is some research to suggest that older adults and younger adults are equally susceptible to misinformation effects.^[13]

Influential Factors

Sleep

Controversial perspectives exist regarding the effects of sleep on the misinformation effect. One school of thought supports the idea that sleep can increase individual vulnerability to the misinformation effect. Some evidence has been found that misinformation susceptibility increases after a sleeping cycle. In this study, the participants that displayed the least degree of misinformation susceptibility were the ones who had not slept since exposure to the original information, indicating that a cycle of sleep increased susceptibility.^[14] Researchers have also found that individuals display a stronger misinformation effect when they have a 12-hour sleep interval in between witnessing an event and learning misinformation than when they have a 12-hour wakefulness interval in between the event and the introduction of misinformation.^[15]

In contrast, a different school of thought holds that sleep deprivation leads to greater vulnerability to the Misinformation effect. This view holds that Sleep Deprivation increases individual suggestibility.^[16] This view then posits that this increased susceptibility would result in an related increase in the development of false memories.^[17][18]

Strategies to Reduce the Misinformation Effect

Post-Misinformation Corrections and Warnings

Correcting misinformation after having been exposed to misinformation has been shown to be effective at significantly reducing the misinformation effect.^[19] Similarly, researchers have also examined whether warning people that they might have been exposed to misinformation after the fact impacts the misinformation effect.^[20][7] A meta-analysis of studies researching the effect of warnings after the introduction of misinformation found that warning participants about misinformation was an effective way to reduce — though not eliminate — the misinformation effect.^[20] However, the efficacy of post-warnings appears to be significantly lower when using a recall test.^[20] Warnings also appear to be less effective when people have been exposed to misinformation more frequently.^[7]

Implications

Current research on the misinformation effect presents numerous implications for our understanding of human memory overall.

Variability

Some reject the notion that misinformation always causes impairment of original memories.^[21] Modified tests can be used to examine the issue of long-term memory impairment.^[21] In one example of such a test,(1985) participants were shown a burglar with a hammer.^[22] Standard post-event information claimed the weapon was a screwdriver and participants were likely to choose the screwdriver rather than the hammer as correct. In the modified test condition, post-event information was not limited to one item, instead participants had the option of the hammer and another tool (a wrench, for example). In this condition, participants generally chose the hammer, showing that there was no memory impairment.^[22]

Rich False Memories

Rich false memories are researchers' attempts to plant entire memories of events which never happened in participants' memories. Examples of such memories include fabricated stories about participants getting lost in the supermarket or shopping mall as children. Researchers have also found that they were able to induce rich false memories of committing a crime in early adolescence using a false narrative paradigm.^[23]

Researchers often rely on suggestive interviews and the power of suggestion from family members, known as “familial informant false narrative procedure.”^[21] Around 30% of subjects have gone on to produce either partial or complete false memories in these studies.^[21] There is a concern that real memories and experiences may be surfacing as a result of prodding and interviews. To deal with this concern, many researchers switched to implausible memory scenarios.^[21]

Daily Applications: Eyewitness Testimony

The misinformation effect can be observed in many situations. For example, after witnessing a crime or accident there may be opportunities for witnesses to interact and share information. Late-arriving bystanders or members of the media may ask witnesses to recall the event before law enforcement or legal representatives have the opportunity to interview them.^[24] Collaborative recall may lead to a more accurate account of what happened, as opposed to individual responses that may contain more untruths after the fact.^[24]

In addition, while remembering small details may not seem important, they can matter tremendously in certain situations. A jury's perception of a defendant's guilt or innocence could depend on such a detail. If a witness remembers a moustache or a weapon when there was none, the wrong person may be wrongly convicted.^[25]

References