Abstract
When people are exposed to misleading details after a witnessed event, they often claim that they saw the misleading details as part of the event. We refer to this as themisinformation effect. In four experiments, involving 570 subjects, we explored the role that discrepancy detection plays in the misinformation effect. Experiment 1 showed that subjects who naturally read a post-event narrative more slowly were more resistant to the effects of misleading information contained in the narrative. In Experiment 2, subjects who naturally read more slowly were more likely to detect a discrepancy between what they were reading and what was stored in their memory. In Experiment 3, subjects who were instructed to read slowly were more likely to detect a discrepancy than were those who were instructed to read quickly. In Experiment 4, subjects who were instructed to read slowly were more resistant to misleading postevent information. Taken together, these results suggest that longer reading times are associated with a greater scrutiny of postevent information. This leads to an increased likelihood that discrepancies will be detected and that the misinformation will be resisted.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bekerian, D. A., &Bowers, J. M. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we misled?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,9, 139–145.
Bowers, J. M., &Bekerian, D. A. (1984). When will post-event information distort eyewitness testimony?Journal of Applied Psychology,69, 466–472.
Christiaansen, R. E., Sweeney, J. D., &Ochalek, K. (1983). Influencing eyewitness descriptions.Law & Human Behavior,7, 59–65.
Cole, W. G., &Loftus, E. F. (1979). Incorporating new information into memory.American Journal of Psychology,92, 413–425.
Dodd, D. H., &Bradshaw, J. M. (1980). Leading questions and memory: Pragmatic constraints.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 695–704.
Greene, E., Flynn, M. S., &Loftus, E. F. (1982). Inducing resistance to misleading information.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,21, 207–219.
Hertel, P. T. (1982). Remembering reactions and facts: The influence of subsequent information.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory, & Cognition,8, 513–529.
Hertel, P. T., Cosden, M., &Johnson, P. J. (1980). Passage recall: Schema change and cognitive flexibility.Journal of Educational Psychology,72, 133–140.
Loftus, E. F. (1979).Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Loftus, E. F. (1981). Mentalmorphosis: Alterations in memory produced by mental bonding of new information to old. In J. Long & A. Baddeley (Eds.),Attention and performance IX (pp. 417–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., &Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic Integration of verbal information into visual memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,4, 19–31.
Loftus, E. F., Schooler, J. W., &Wagenaar, W. A. (1985). The fate of memory: Comment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 375–380.
McCloskey, M., &Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,114, 1–16.
Sheehan, P. W., Grigo, L, &McCann, T. (1984). Memory distortion following exposure to false information in hypnosis.Journal of Abnormal Psychology,93, 259–265.
Sheehan, P. W., &McConkey, K. M. (1982).Hypnosis and experience. The exploration of phenomena and process. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Sheehan, P., &Tilden, J. (1983) Effects of suggestibility and hypnosis on accurate and distorted retrieval from memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory. & Cognition,9, 283–293
Spiro, R. J. (1977). Constructing a theory of reconstructive memory: The state of schema approach In R. C. Anderson, R. J Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.),Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Weinberg, H. I., Wadsworth, J., &Baron, R. S. (1983). Demand and the impact of leading questions on eyewitness testimony.Memory & Cognition,11, 101–104.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Mental Health. David Hall, who is at Thiel College, spent a year at the University of Washington with funding from the National Science Foundation and his college.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tousignant, J.P., Hall, D. & Loftus, E.F. Discrepancy detection and vulnerability to misleading postevent information. Mem Cogn 14, 329–338 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202511
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202511