TY - JOUR
T1 - Protective effects of testing across misinformation formats in the household scene paradigm
AU - Pereverseff, Rosemary S.
AU - Bodner, Glen E.
AU - Huff, Mark J.
PY - 2020/3/1
Y1 - 2020/3/1
N2 - Many studies have demonstrated retrieval-enhanced suggestibility (RES), in which taking an initial recall test after witnessing an event increases suggestibility to subsequent misinformation introduced via a narrative. Recently, however, initial testing has been found to have a protective effect against misinformation introduced via cued-recall questions. We examined whether misinformation format (narrative vs. cued-recall questions) yields a similar dissociation in a paradigm that, to date, has consistently yielded a protective effect of testing (PET). After studying photos of household scenes (e.g., kitchen), some participants took an initial recall test. After a 48-hr delay, items not presented in the scenes (e.g., knives/plates) were suggested either via narrative or questions. Regardless of the misinformation format, we found a PET on both initial-test-conditionalised free recall and source-monitoring tests. However, initial testing also yielded memory costs, such that suggested items reported on the initial test were likely to persist on a final recall test. Thus, initial testing can protect against suggestibility, but can also precipitate memory errors when intrusions emerge on an initial test.
AB - Many studies have demonstrated retrieval-enhanced suggestibility (RES), in which taking an initial recall test after witnessing an event increases suggestibility to subsequent misinformation introduced via a narrative. Recently, however, initial testing has been found to have a protective effect against misinformation introduced via cued-recall questions. We examined whether misinformation format (narrative vs. cued-recall questions) yields a similar dissociation in a paradigm that, to date, has consistently yielded a protective effect of testing (PET). After studying photos of household scenes (e.g., kitchen), some participants took an initial recall test. After a 48-hr delay, items not presented in the scenes (e.g., knives/plates) were suggested either via narrative or questions. Regardless of the misinformation format, we found a PET on both initial-test-conditionalised free recall and source-monitoring tests. However, initial testing also yielded memory costs, such that suggested items reported on the initial test were likely to persist on a final recall test. Thus, initial testing can protect against suggestibility, but can also precipitate memory errors when intrusions emerge on an initial test.
KW - initial testing
KW - Misinformation effect
KW - protective effect of testing
KW - recall
KW - retrieval-enhanced suggestibility
KW - source monitoring
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079203055&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1747021819881948
DO - 10.1177/1747021819881948
M3 - Article
C2 - 31561745
AN - SCOPUS:85079203055
SN - 1747-0218
VL - 73
SP - 425
EP - 441
JO - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
JF - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
IS - 3
ER -