Individuals were found to be more susceptible to misremembering an event when they encountered misleading post-event information from a social source than when they encountered misleading post-event information from a non-social source. 

Socially vs. Non-Socially Encountered Misinformation

Although older adults tend to have less accurate memories of an event overall, they are less likely to affirm post-event misinformation than their younger counterparts. One possible explanation for this is that younger adults may feel more pressure to be in agreement with others.

Age differences in susceptibility to post-event misinformation

In a foundational 1974 study, Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer explored how leading questions could influence memory. They presented films of car accidents to 45 college students and asked them to estimate the speed of the vehicles. The critical manipulation was the verb used in the question, 'About how fast were the cars going when they ___ each other?' The verb was varied with words like 'smashed,' 'collided,' 'bumped,' 'hit,' or 'contacted.' The results showed a clear correlation between the intensity of the verb and the speed estimate: 'smashed' yielded an average estimate of about 41 mph, 'collided' 39 mph, 'bumped' 37 mph, 'hit' 34 mph, and 'contacted' 32 mph. In a follow-up a week later, participants in the 'smashed' group were also more than twice as likely to falsely recall seeing broken glass, demonstrating that post-event information can distort memories and even create false ones.

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Car Crash Experiment

A person witnesses a minor car accident where a blue car fails to stop at a stop sign. The next day, a police officer interviewing the witness asks, "How fast was the blue car going when it ran the yield sign?" Based on what is known about memory, what is the most likely outcome when the witness is asked to recall the event again a week later?

Information presented after someone witnesses an event that is misleading and can potentially change their memory of that event. It is often problematic in criminal cases when witnesses are given MPI.

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor

Google

Misleading information that is presented to someone after witnessing event can change how they recall and explain that event. One common explanation is retroactive interference (new learning interfering with old memory/understanding)

Misinformation  Effect Paradigm

Despite the known fragility of human memory, the legal system, including police, prosecutors, and courts, often depends heavily on eyewitness testimony for criminal prosecutions. This reliance is problematic because memory is a reconstructive process, making eyewitness accounts susceptible to errors that can lead to faulty identifications and, ultimately, wrongful convictions.

Eyewitness Testimony and its Unreliability

Goldstein, E. B. (2014). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience. Nelson Education.


Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research and everyday experience

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020, April 22). Psychology (2nd ed.). OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/1-introduction

OpenStax Psychology (2nd ed.) Textbook

Misleading Postevent Information (MPI)

Gabbert, F., Memon, A., Allan, K., & Wright, D.B. (2004/2010). Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 9(2), 215–227. https://doi.org/10.1348/1355325041719428

Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation

Aging and the Misinformation Effect: A Neuropsychological Analysis

One factor that could affect one's susceptibility to the misinformation effect is sleep. However, the research conducted on this relationship has yielded inconclusive results. 

The Misinformation Effect and Sleep

Methods for Studying the Misinformation Effect

Since self-confidence and memory are positively linked, it is thought that a positive self-image should be linked to lower susceptibility to the misinformation effect. This hypothesis assumes that susceptibility to misinformation is at least in part due to a lack of confidence in one's memories. 

Positive feedback to protect against the misinformation effect

The idea that memory reports become contaminated with information coming from sources other than the original

Memory Misinformation Effect

The idea that the misinformation effect can occur without memory distortions or source monitoring errors

Non-Memory Misinformation Effect

An intervention to the misinformation effect consisting of the addition of a warning after the presentation of misleading information. Post-warnings intend to encourage less reliance on information presented after an event.

Misinformation Effect Interventions: Post-warnings

- Memory impairment 
- Biased responding
- Source misattribution
- Memory conversion processes

Misinformation Effect: Mechanisms

False memories germinated from misinformation that an individual whole-heartedly believed in and can provide emotional, sensational, and factual details when recalling. 


Rich False Memories

When eyewitnesses receive confirmatory feedback after giving their testimony, their confidence in their understanding and recall of the events is increased. This is a problem because jurors make decisions based on the confident of witnesses, which can be overinflated due to confirmatory feedback regardless of the actual validity.

Post-identification feedback effect

An interview procedure developed by cognitive psychologists based on memory retrieval research and understanding. Allows the witness to talk with little to no interruptions. Uses techniques to try to simulate putting the witness back to the scene of the crime in order to recreate the events.

Cognitive Interview

People tend to pay attention to the weapon while a crime is being committed (a highly emotional situation). This can restrict a witness' awarenesses of the events leading up to and during a crime.

Weapons focus

Eye-witness testimonies are likely to be flawed or unreliable if the witness is exposed to an inaccurate account of the crime, particularly if this account comes from another person in a social context. While discussing the crime with co-witnesses may help to improve one’s overall memory of the event, inaccurate information encountered during such an interaction is likely to lead to memory distortions.

The impact of socially encountered misinformation on eye-witness testimonies 

Though human memory is fragile, legal and investigative processes often depend on eyewitness testimony. This reliance is risky, as suggestive police identification procedures can cause eyewitnesses to make incorrect identifications, and such false testimonies can result in wrongful convictions. According to the Innocence Project's analysis of the first 239 DNA exonerations, eyewitness misidentification was a contributing factor in approximately 75% of these cases, establishing it as the leading cause.

Eyewitness Misidentification

Suggestibility is a memory distortion error where individuals accept and incorporate misinformation from external sources into their personal recollections. This process, which can be triggered by leading questions from sources like a therapist or a police interviewer, can lead to the creation of false memories for events or details that were only suggested, not actually experienced.

Suggestibility

An analysis of the first 239 DNA exoneration cases by the Innocence Project identified several common causes of wrongful convictions. Eyewitness misidentification was the most frequent factor, contributing to about 75% of cases. Other significant causes included flawed forensic science (about 49%), false confessions (about 23%), and unreliable informant testimony (about 18%).

Common Causes of Wrongful Conviction in DNA Exoneration Cases

The Innocence Project is a non-profit organization dedicated to exonerating individuals who have been wrongly convicted of crimes. A significant focus of its work is on cases where convictions were based on flawed eyewitness testimony.

The Innocence Project

The investigation into Elizabeth Smart's abduction illustrates the benefits of careful eyewitness management. The sole eyewitness, her nine-year-old sister Mary Katherine, was handled with caution by the FBI and police. To avoid implanting false memories or misleading her, they refrained from using standard procedures like police line-ups or pushing for a composite sketch. This preservation of her memory proved crucial when, months later, she recalled the abductor's voice from a prior encounter, leading to his identification and Elizabeth's safe return.

The Elizabeth Smart Case: An Example of Cautious Eyewitness Procedures

Within the legal system, judges can implement safeguards to address the potential unreliability of eyewitness testimony. These measures include instructing the jury about the possibility of misidentification and having the authority to suppress testimony that is deemed untrustworthy.

Judicial Safeguards for Eyewitness Testimony

From a psychological perspective, analyze why this eyewitness's testimony might be unreliable, despite their high level of confidence. Explain the underlying principles of memory that support your analysis.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After