Regular Article
Misinformation Effects in Recall: Creating False Memories through Repeated Retrieval

https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0017Get rights and content

Abstract

In two experiments subjects viewed slides depicting a crime and then received a narrative containing misleading information about some items in the slides. Recall instructions were manipulated on a first test to vary the probability that subjects would produce details from the narrative that conflicted with details from the slides. Two days later subjects returned and took a second cued recall test on which they were instructed to respond only if they were sure they had seen the item in the slide sequence. Our interest was in examining subjects’ production of the misleading postevent information on the second cued recall test (on which they were instructed to ignore the postevent information) as a function of instructions given before the first test. In both experiments, robust misinformation effects occurred, with misrecall being greatest under conditions in which subjects had produced the wrong detail from the narrative on the first test. In this condition subjects were more likely to recall the wrong detail on the second test and were also more likely to say that they remembered its occurrence, when instructed to use Tulving's (1985)remember/knowprocedure, than in comparison conditions. We conclude that a substantial misinformation effect occurs in recall and that repeated testing increases the effect. False memories may arise through repeated retrieval.

References (0)

Cited by (128)

  • Incidental news exposure and COVID-19 misperceptions: A moderated-mediation model

    2022, Computers in Human Behavior
    Citation Excerpt :

    In terms of misinformation, exposure to misleading information may activate certain memories, resonating with specific information while forgetting other factual details. Moreover, repeated exposure to misinformation can result in the increase in individuals’ belief in the misleading information (Hyman, Husband, & Billings, 1995; Loftus & Ketcham, 1994; Roediger, Jacoby, & McDermott, 1996) making it harder for people to debunk misinformation. Individual's misperceptions can be related to information acquisition.

  • Recognition memory: Tulving's contributions and some new findings

    2020, Neuropsychologia
    Citation Excerpt :

    Gardiner began a program of research using the remember/know (R/K) procedure (e.g., Gardiner, 1988; Gardiner and Java, 1990) that brought the technique to greater awareness, reported interesting findings, and began all sorts of debates about what remember/know (R/K) judgments mean, ones that still resonate today. Most R/K experiments employ recognition memory, although experiments using cued recall (Roediger et al., 1996) and free recall (Hamilton and Rajaram, 2003; McDermott, 1996) are possible, as Tulving (1985) showed in his original paper. One argument is that R/K judgments reflect nothing more than different levels of confidence (e.g., Donaldson, 1996; Dunn, 2004; Rotello and Zeng, 2008).

  • Retrieval aids the creation of a generalised memory trace and strengthens episode-unique information

    2019, NeuroImage
    Citation Excerpt :

    Consequently, we are unable to claim that the generalisation and episodic strengthening effects observed in our study will translate into behaviour in the short- or long-term. As mentioned above, however, there are studies indicating that repeated retrieval enhances the strength of the target memory (Lee et al., 2017) and produces an increase in contextual recollection (Chan and McDermott, 2007), but concurrently also increases the likelihood of endorsing perceptually (Lee et al., 2017) or semantically (Roediger et al., 1996) related lure items as old. The pattern of behavioural changes that has been reported in the existing literature is thus well aligned with our finding that retrieval concurrently strengthens semantic and episodic aspects of a memory trace.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text