Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 480–485

Memory conformity: Disentangling the steps toward influence during a discussion

Article

Abstract

When two people see the same event and discuss it, one person’s memory report can influence what the other person subsequently claims to remember. We refer to this asmemory conformity. In the present article, two factors underlying the memory conformity effect are investigated. First, are there any characteristics of the dialogue that predict memory conformity? Second, is memory conformity differentially affected when information is encountered that omits, adds to, or contradicts originally encoded items? Participants were tested in pairs. The two members of each pair encoded slightly different versions of complex scenes and discussed them prior to an individual free recall test. The discussions were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed. Our most striking finding was that the witness initiating the discussion was most likely to influence the other witness’s memory report. Furthermore, witnesses were most likely to be influenced when an additional (previously unseen) item of information was encountered in the discussion.

References

  1. Cialdini, R. B., &Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity.Annual Review of Psychology,55, 591–621.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Deutsch, M., &Gerard, H. G. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgement.Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology,59, 204–209.Google Scholar
  3. Edwards, D., &Middleton, D. (1986). Joint remembering: Constructing an account of shared experience through conversational discourse.Discourse Processes,8, 177–204.Google Scholar
  4. Forbes, K. E., &Venneri, A. (2003). A case for case: Handling letter case selection in written spelling.Neuropsychologia,41, 16–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Gabbert, F., & Allan, K. (2005).I still think it was a banana: The persistent distorting after-effect of normative social influence on memory. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  6. Gabbert, F., Memon, A., &Allan, K. (2003). Memory conformity: Can eyewitnesses influence each other’s memories for an event?Applied Cognitive Psychology,17, 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gabbert, F., Memon, A., Allan, K., &Wright, D. B. (2004). Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation.Legal & Criminological Psychology,9, 215–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kanematsu, H., Mori, K., &Mori, H. (2003). Memory distortion in eyewitness pairs who observed nonconforming events and discussed them.Journal of the Faculty of Education, Shinshu University,109, 75–84.Google Scholar
  9. Loftus, E. F. (1979).Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Loftus, E. F., Levidow, B., &Deunsing, S. (1992). Who remembers best? Individual differences in memory for events that occurred in a science museum.Applied Cognitive Psychology,6, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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 & Memory,4, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Marsh, E. J., Tversky, B., &Hutson, M. (2005). How eyewitnesses talk about events: Implications for memory.Applied Cognitive Psychology,19, 531–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meade, M. L., &Roediger, H. L.,III (2002). Explorations in the social contagion of memory.Memory & Cognition,30, 995–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pasupathi, M., Stallworth, L. M., & Murdoch, K. (1998). How what we tell becomes what we know: Listener effects on speakers’ long-term memory for events.Discourse Processes,26, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W., &Prosser, B. (2004).A user’s guide to MLwiN (Version 2.0). London: Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  16. Reysen, M. B. (2005). The effects of conformity on recognition judgements.Memory,13, 87–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Roediger, H. L., III,Meade, M. L., & Bergman, E. T. (2001). Social contagion of memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 365–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schooler, J. W., Gerhard, D., &Loftus, E. F. (1986). Qualities of the unreal.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,12, 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wright, D. B. (1998). Modelling clustered data in autobiographical memory research: The multilevel approach.Applied Cognitive Psychology,12, 339–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wright, D. B., Loftus, E. F., &Hall, M. (2001). Now you see it; now you don’t: Inhibiting recall and recognition of scenes.Applied Cognitive Psychology,15, 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wright, D. B., Mathews, S. A., &Skagerberg, E. M. (2005). Social recognition memory: The effect of other people’s responses for previously seen and unseen items.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied,11, 200–209.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Wright, D. B., Self, G., &Justice, C. (2000). Memory conformity: Exploring misinformation effects when presented by another person.British Journal of Psychology,91, 189–202.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of PsychologyUniversity of AbertayDundeeScotland
  2. 2.University of AberdeenAberdeenScotland
  3. 3.University of SussexBrightonEngland

Personalised recommendations