Psychological Research

, Volume 72, Issue 4, pp 362–375 | Cite as

The Red Herring technique: a methodological response to the problem of demand characteristics

  • Cara Laney
  • Suzanne O. Kaasa
  • Erin K. Morris
  • Shari R. Berkowitz
  • Daniel M. Bernstein
  • Elizabeth F. Loftus
Original Article


In past research, we planted false memories for food related childhood events using a simple false feedback procedure. Some critics have worried that our findings may be due to demand characteristics. In the present studies, we developed a novel procedure designed to reduce the influence of demand characteristics by providing an alternate magnet for subjects’ natural suspicions. We used two separate levels of deception. In addition to giving subjects a typical untrue rationale for the study (i.e., normal deceptive cover story), we built in strong indicators (the “Red Herring”) that the study actually had another purpose. Later, we told subjects that we had deceived them, and asked what they believed the “real purpose” of the study was. We also interviewed a subset of subjects in depth in order to analyze their subjective experiences of the procedure and any relevant demand. Our Red Herring successfully tricked subjects, and left little worry that our false memory results were due to demand. This “double cross” technique may have widespread uses in psychological research that hopes to conceal its real hypotheses from experimental subjects.



This work was partially supported by the Grawemeyer Prize in Psychology, awarded to Elizabeth Loftus. In addition, we would like to thank the other members of the “Memory & Law” seminar at the University of California, Irvine where the Red Herring idea first took shape.


  1. Bernstein, D. M., Laney, C., Morris, E. K., & Loftus, E. F. (2005a). False memories about food can lead to food avoidance. Social Cognition, 23, 10–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernstein, D. M., Laney, C., Morris, E. K., & Loftus, E. F. (2005b). False beliefs about fattening foods can have healthy consequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 13724–13731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjorklund, D. F., Cassel, W. S., Bjorklund, B. R., Brown, R. D., Park, C. L., et al., (2000). Social demand characteristics in children’s and adults’ eyewitness memory and suggestibility: the effects of different interviews on free recall and recognition. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 421–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryant, R. A., & Mallard, D. (2005). Reality monitoring in hypnosis: a real-simulating analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 53, 13–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryant, R. A., Barnier, A. J., Mallard, D., & Tibbits, R. (1999). Posthypnotic amnesia for material learned before hypnosis. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 47, 46–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Garry, M., Manning, C. G., Loftus, E. F., & Sherman, S. J. (1996). Imagination inflation: imagining a childhood event inflates confidence that it occurred. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 208–214.Google Scholar
  7. Hyman, I. E. Jr, Husband, T. H., & Billings, F. J. (1995). False memories of childhood experiences. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. M., & Payne, D. G. (1999). Source attributions and false memories: a test of the demand characteristics account. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 130–135.Google Scholar
  9. Laney, C. (2006). Emotional content of true and false memories. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Irivine.Google Scholar
  10. Lindsay, D. S. (1990). Misleading suggestions can impair eyewitnesses’ ability to remember event details. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1077–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Loftus, E. F., & Pickrell, J. E. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric Annals, 25, 720–725.Google Scholar
  12. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MacLeod, C. M. (1999). The item and list methods of directed forgetting: test differences and the role of demand characteristics. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 123–129.Google Scholar
  14. Morris, E. K., Laney, C., Bernstein, D. M., & Loftus, E. F. (2006). Susceptibility to memory distortion: how do we decide it has occurred? American Journal of Psychology, 119, 255–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nisbett, R., & Wilson, T. (1977). Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Orne, M. T. (1959). The nature of hypnosis: artifact and essence. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 277–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: with particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Orne, M. T. (1979). On the simulating subjects as a quasi-control group in hypnosis research: What, why, and how. In: E. Fromm, & R. E. Shor (Eds.), Hypnosis: Developments in Research and New Perspectives, 2nd edn (pp. 519–565). Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  19. Page, M. M., & Scheidt, R. J. (1971). The elusive weapons effect: demand awareness, valuation apprehension, and slightly sophisticated subjects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 20, 304–318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wade, K. A., Garry, M., Read, J. D., & Lindsay, D. S. (2002). A picture is worth a thousand lies: using false photographs to create false childhood memories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 597–603.Google Scholar
  21. Weinberg, H. I., Wadsworth, J., & Baron, R. S. (1983). Demand and the impact of leading questions on eyewitness testimony. Memory & Cognition, 11, 101–104.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cara Laney
    • 1
    • 4
  • Suzanne O. Kaasa
    • 1
  • Erin K. Morris
    • 1
  • Shari R. Berkowitz
    • 1
  • Daniel M. Bernstein
    • 2
    • 3
  • Elizabeth F. Loftus
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  2. 2.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  3. 3.Kwantlen University CollegeSurreyCanada
  4. 4.Forensic PsychologyUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations