Eyewitness memory following discussion: using the MORI technique with a Western sample

Abstract

Researchers studying memory conformity have made significant advances in our understanding of the phenomenon, but have used methods with significant shortcomings. Mori's three-stage method addresses many of these concerns. To date the technique has not been replicated on a Western sample. We present such a study, and discuss two significant improvements to Mori's method. We found that subjects were more likely to report the correct answer for non-discussed critical details than discussed critical details. Our data also suggested that when subjects agreed with their partner's information during the discussion, they did so because they thought that information was accurate; only a minority of the time did they go along with their partner during discussion and revert to their own answer at the test. We draw parallels between the unknown mechanisms driving memory conformity effects and the search for mechanisms driving the misinformation effect two decades ago.

Can a witness report hearsay evidence unintentionally? The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory

“…In accordance with previously demonstrated results (e.g., Gabbert et al, 2001;Garry et al, 2008;Wright et al, 2000), it was hypothesized that individuals who discussed the event with a co-witness who had seen a different version of the video would show less accurate memory than those in the natural discussion groups or those who did not discuss the event.…”

“…Because the participants were unaware that they had seen different stimuli, their interactions with the group were likely to be more natural than those of delegated confederates. This methodology has been used in several studies of the effects of co-witness discussion on memory (e.g., Gabbert, Memon, & Allan, 2003;Garry, French, Kinzett, & Mori, 2008;Paterson, Kemp, & Ng, 2009;Wright, Self, & Justice, 2000). These studies have largely confirmed the results of studies using confederates, finding that participants who viewed different versions of the video erroneously recalled items from the alternative version of the stimulus when later giving their individual accounts.…”

Both young and older adults discount suggestions from older adults on a social memory test

“…On subsequent individual recall and recognition tests, participants often incorporate the confederates' errors into their own memory reports, a process termed the social contagion of memory. Research in the related, memory conformity paradigm has also demonstrated the powerful effect of social influence on false memory (Allan & Gabbert, 2008;Bodner, Musch, & Azad, 2009;Gabbert, Memon, & Allan, 2003;Gabbert, Memon, Allan, & Wright, 2004;Gabbert, Memon, & Wright, 2006Garry, French, Kinzett, & Mori, 2008;Skagerberg & Wright, 2008a, 2008bWright, Gabbert, Memon, & London, 2008;Wright, Self, & Justice, 2000).…”

Age trends and suggestibility : the effects of social influence

“…Other studies have explored variations of OP by having adult participants receive information directly from a co-witness, instead of implying what a co-witness had allegedly said, showing various decreases in memory accuracy after witnesses have been exposed to co-witness information (Garry, French, Kinzett, & Mori, 2008;Roediger, Meade, & Bergman, 2001;Skagerberg & Wright, 2008). Merckelbach, Van Roermund, and Candel (2007) found that having a confederate deny true information was just as powerful as providing misinformation during a collaborative recall study.…”