Reducing and reversing pseudomemories with hypnosis

Abstract

As a forensic memory enhancement tool, hypnosis is problematic because it tends to increase pseudomemory responses and infl ate confi dence regardless of accuracy. A variety of evidence suggests that major infl uences in producing these effects are expectancy and demand characteristics. However, if expectancy and demand characteristics play a role in increasing false positive responses with hypnosis, it may be possible to use the same factors to reduce false positive responses. Some have argued that the standard misinformation effect in nonhypnotic situations may be infl uenced by expectancy and demand characteristics. Consequently, if subjects are given misleading information followed by an instruction suggesting that hypnosis will reduce the infl uence of misinformation, hypnosis may reduce rather than increase false positive responses, including spurious confi dence in errors. In this paper two studies are described that lend some experimental support for this hypothesis. The fi rst showed that, when participants are not given an opportunity to commit themselves to making errors, the misinformation effect can be eliminated if hypnosis is given together with a suggestion that it will help participants discriminate between correct and incorrect information. The second study showed that a similar posthypnotic suggestion was more effective than a warning alone in reducing or reversing misinformation errors even after participants had committed themselves to reporting such errors. There was no evidence of infl ated confi dence with hypnosis in either study.

Enhancing Witness Memory with Focused Meditation and Eye-Closure: Assessing the Effects of Misinformation

“…However, whilst it is possible that the reductions in errors in experiments 2 and 3 may have been due entirely to the memory enhancement effects of the combined Focused Meditation/eye-closure technique, other explanations are possible. For example, a variety of evidence suggests that false memory effects can be inflated by demand characteristics and response bias effects (Murray et al 1992;Sjödén et al 2009;Smeets et al 2009;Wagstaff and Frost 1996;Wagstaff et al 2008). In such circumstances, Focused Meditation could be construed as a procedure that changes the contextual demands of the situation facilitating, or "legitimizing", resistance to misleading information and the overturning of previous spurious memory reports.…”

Hypnosis as performance autoethnography in qualitative sociological research

“…A major concern for sociology researchers planning to use hypnosis as an autoecological tool is whether hypnosis is an effective and efficacious modality for facilitating a true and accurate recall of past events, situations and emotions. Memory retention and recall has been the subject of extensive discussion and research over many years and much still remains unclear about the psychology and neurophysiology of the hypnotic phenomenon (Wagstaff et al , 2008; Thompson et al , 2013; Waters et al , 2014; Thompson et al , 2014; Painter and Kring, 2015; Grysman and Fivush, 2016).…”

“…Gleaves et al (2004). Wagstaff et al (2008) and Gudjonsson et al (2014) all accept that memory recall can generate false memories and Wagstaff et al (2011) suggested that highly hypnotisable individuals might be more prone in this respect. The potential of hypnotic regression for evoking false memories of past childhood events and abuse was the subject of much contention during the 1990s and the early years of the 21st century and is one which has yet to be fully resolved (Chu et al , 1999; Green, 1999; Patihis et al , 2014; Mazzoni et al , 2014).…”

Hypnosis and false memories.

“…Accordingly, it seems that false memories are reduced when participants receive a hypnotic instruction that increases their vigilance about the possible presence of misleading information and their ability to distinguish such information from accurate information, in contrast with a “warning” instruction pertaining to the potential of hypnosis to engender false memories (Green et al, 1998). Thus, we suggest that it could be possible to reduce false memories by focusing participants’ attention on the events to be recalled and the potential presence of false information contained therein, rather than on explicitly manipulating participants’ expectations or beliefs about the potential negative effects of hypnosis on memory (Lindsay, 1990; Wagstaff, Brunas-Wagstaff, Cole, & Wheatcroft, 2004; Wagstaff et al, 2004, 2008). In standard experimental situations (i.e., nonhypnotic), introducing sufficiently clear and precise instructions/warnings concerning the vulnerability of memories to error reduces the number of source memory errors, if these instructions are provided prior to when misleading information is presented (Chambers & Zaragoza, 2001; Ecker, Lewandowsky, & Tang, 2010; Greene, Flynn, & Loftus, 1982; Kirsch, 1990, 1991; Neuschatz & Payne, 1996; Qin, Ogle, & Goodman, 2008).…”