From Eyewitness to Academic Contexts: Examining the Effect of Misinformation in First and Second Languages

Smith, Kendra C.; Multhaup, Kristi S.; Ihejirika-Lomedico, Rivka

doi:10.1002/acp.3352

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Educators sometimes accidently verbally contradict written information provided to their students prior to teaching sessions (e.g., lecture slide handouts), creating a situation where misinformation has been introduced, but where students may not immediately realize. Smith et al (2017) even demonstrated that misinformation can be introduced to students when they copy lecture notes from each other. Written notes about a lecture were given to a participant, with the notes containing deliberate mistakes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

Neil¹,

Higham²,

Fox³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most misinformation studies, participants are exposed to a to-be-remembered event, and then subsequently given misinformation in textual form. This misinformation impacts on people's ability to accurately report the initial event. In this paper, we present two experiments that explored a different approach to presenting misinformation. In the context of a murder suspect, the to-be-remembered event was audio of a police interview, whilst the misinformation was co-presented as subtitles with some words being different to, and more incriminating than, those that were actually said. We refer to this as concurrent misinformation. In Experiment 1, concurrent misinformation was inappropriately reported in a cued-recall test, and inflated participants' ratings of how incriminating the audio was. Experiment 2 attempted to employ warnings to mitigate the influence of concurrent misinformation. Warnings after the to-be-remembered event had no effect, whilst warnings before the event reduced the effect of concurrent misinformation for a subset of participants. Participants that noticed the discrepancy between the audio and the subtitles were also less likely to judge the audio as incriminating. These results were considered in relation to existing theories underlying the misinformation effect, as well as the implication for the use of audio and text in applied contexts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

Neil¹,

Higham²,

Fox³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, Smith et al. (2017) found that participants who spoke English more fluently than Spanish (unbalanced bilinguals) remembered more information presented in English (lecture and lecture notes) compared to in Spanish. Lecture notes presented some misinformation.…”

Section: Forensic Interviews With L2 Speakersmentioning

confidence: 86%

When the eyewitness to a crime is an English language learner: Identifying and resolving troubles in understanding in interviews

Allison

Gerwing

Gadaire

2022

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigative interviewing can be a difficult task. Challenges may be exacerbated when interviewing English language learners. The field of eyewitness testimony lacks research on what troubles of understanding are generated by non-native speakers and how these troubles are resolved. Thus, we undertook an exploratory study in which we aimed to provide definitions for identifying and characterising both troubles of understanding and resolutions. Data were simulated interviews between 17 dyads of native English-speaking student-interviewers and English language learner witnesses of a mock crime. We identified misunderstandings in each interaction and tracked who misunderstood, when the misunderstanding occurred (free/cued recall), whether it was resolved, and resolution strategies. We validated video analysis by checking for information consistency in the subsequent interviewer notes. Across dyads, 40 misunderstandings were found, with at least one in each interview.Witnesses misunderstood significantly more in the cued recall portion of the interview, while interviewers misunderstood more during free recall. Notably, participants resolved misunderstandings more often than not, used a variety of resolution strategies, and employed more strategies in unre-

show abstract

“…When bilinguals are concerned, it also means that encoding can be different depending on the language they use at the moment. Yet, while episodic and autobiographical memory in bilinguals has been widely researched and differences in encoding and retrieval processes were observed (Boroditsky et al, 2009 ; Fausey and Boroditsky, 2011 ; Aydin and Ceci, 2013 ), there have been only a handful of studies investigating the suggestibility in bilinguals (Shaw et al, 1997 ; Smith et al, 2017 ; Calvillo and Mills, 2020 ). Although misinformation effect was present in all these cross-linguistic studies, the results regarding the influence of the language on the endorsement of false information show inconsistent findings, reporting no significant differences between the conditions (Shaw et al, 1997 ) or explaining the results in relation to the different levels of proficiency between the languages (Calvillo and Mills, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

False Memories in Native and Foreign Languages

Dolgoarshinnaia

Martín-Luengo

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human memory is prone to memory errors and distortion. Evidence from studies on cognitive functions in bilinguals indicates that they might be prone to different types of memory errors compared to monolinguals; however, the effect of language in false memories is still understudied. Source monitoring processes required for proper memory functioning, presumably, rely on inhibitory control, which is also heavily utilized by bilinguals. Moreover, it is suggested that thinking in a second language leads to more systematic and deliberate reasoning. All these results lead to expect that bilinguals are more analytical when processing information in their second language overcoming some memory errors depending on the language of information. To test this hypothesis, we run a classical misinformation experiment with an explicit source monitoring task with a sample of Russian–English bilinguals. The language of the misinformation presentation did not affect the degree of the misinformation effect between the Russian and English languages. Source monitoring demonstrated an overall higher accuracy for attributions to the English source over the Russian source. Furthermore, analysis on incorrect source attributions showed that when participants misattributed the sources of false information (English or Russian narrative), they favored the Russian source over the not presented condition. Taken together, these results imply that high proficiency in the second language does not affect misinformation and that information processing and memory monitoring in bilinguals can differ depending on the language of the information, which seems to lead to some memory errors and not others.

show abstract

From Eyewitness to Academic Contexts: Examining the Effect of Misinformation in First and Second Languages

Cited by 3 publications

References 35 publications

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

Can you trust what you hear? Concurrent misinformation affects recall memory and judgments of guilt.

When the eyewitness to a crime is an English language learner: Identifying and resolving troubles in understanding in interviews

False Memories in Native and Foreign Languages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About