Week 5 Short Misinformation and False Memories in Forensic Psychology

The misinformation effect occurs when suggested information is incorporated into a narrative, leading to the integration of language into memory.
Experiments by Loftus et al. (1978) showed that varying verbs (e.g., "hit" vs. "smashed") influenced speed estimates of vehicles in memory reports.
Misinformation is conveyed through leading questions, modified details (such as stop vs. yield signs), or the presentation of non-existent details.
Example: In the $1995$ Oklahoma Bombing, witness discussion led to the contamination of memories, where three witnesses eventually claimed to remember a second accomplice (McVeigh's supposed partner) who was not initially recalled by all.

Discussion among witnesses is common, occurring in approximately $58\%$ of cases (Skagerberg & Wright, 2008).
Laboratory studies indicate that $71\%$ of witnesses incorporate co-witness misinformation into their own reports (Gabbert et al., 2003).
The effect is stronger among friends or partners compared to strangers and can influence reports even when memories are held with high confidence.
These discussions can result in "memory blends" or source monitoring errors, making it critical for investigators to prevent co-witness interaction.

Source monitoring involves distinguishing between true memories (externally experienced) and false memories (internally generated or imagined).
True memories typically contain more sensory, perceptual, and contextual detail (e.g., time, location, and visual details).
Source errors are more likely when events are ambiguous or incomplete, as individuals use schemas to fill in missing gaps.
Susceptibility to errors varies by individual: children and older adults are generally more susceptible, while individuals with higher Working Memory Capacity (WMC) are less susceptible due to better allocation of attentional resources.

The Three-Step Model for false memory formation includes: 1. Perceiving the target event as plausible; 2. Coming to believe it actually happened; 3. Reinterpreting images and narratives to form a memory.
"Lost in the mall" studies showed that $7$ of $24$ adults "remembered" a false childhood event after being presented with suggested extracts.
The use of doctored photographs, such as the "balloon ride" studies, resulted in $50\%$ of participants forming false memories after three interviews.
False memories can have lasting behavioral consequences, such as avoiding specific foods (e.g., egg salad) for months after being given false suggestions of prior illness.

The "memory wars" debate explores whether recovered memories of abuse are genuine or false.
Anderson et al. (2001, 2004) observed different brain activity patterns during attempts to suppress words, though participants still recalled $80\%$ of suppressed items compared to $87\%$ of control items.
Forgetting of prior remembering (Geraerts et al., 2006) suggests that recall is highly context-dependent; changing the context between the study and the test leads to higher rates of forgetting.
Memories spontaneously recovered or continuous are often corroborated by evidence, whereas memories recovered through suggestive therapy are rarely corroborated (Geraerts et al., 2009).