Immediate and persisting effects of misleading questions and hypnosis on memory reports

Immediate and persisting effects of misleading questions and hypnosis on memory reports were assessed. After listening to a story, 52 highly suggestible students and 59 low and medium suggestible students were asked misleading or neutral questions in or out of hypnosis. All participants were then asked neutral questions without hypnosis. Both hypnosis and misleading questions significantly increased memory errors, and misleading questions produced significantly more errors than did hypnosis. The 2 effects were additive, so that misleading questions in hypnosis produced the greatest number of errors. There were no significant interactions with level of hypnotic suggestibility. Implications of these findings for the per se exclusion of posthypnotic testimony are discussed.     

Hypnotic interviewing: the best way to interview eyewitnesses?

It has been suggested that hypnosis techniques may have the potential to enhance eyewitness memory in forensic investigations. However, laboratory research shows that increases in recall with hypnosis techniques are often associated with decreases in accuracy, false confidence in incorrect information, and increased suggestibility to leading questions and misleading post-event information. These problems limit the usefulness of hypnosis as an interviewing procedure. However, in practical investigations, many factors associated with hypnosis, apart from the hypnotic induction itself, might lead to memory enhancement compared with standard police interviews. For example, hypnotic interviewers, because of their psychological, clinical, and interpersonal skills, may be better interviewers than police officers. They may use effective interviewing strategies such as those associated with the “cognitive interview”; a procedure which has the potential to enhance recall by approximately 35% without the problems of memory distortion associated with hypnosis. It is concluded, therefore, that a cognitive interview procedure should be used in preference to hypnosis. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of suggestibility and hypnosis on accurate and distorted retrieval from memory

Research investigated the hypothesis inferred from the theorizing of Loftus that suggestibility is related to the tendency to incorporate incorrect information into memory when this information has been subtly introduced after the to-be-remembered events have occurred. Specifically, it was predicted that if level of suggestibility is theoretically relevant to subjects' acceptance of misleading information, then more subjects who are highly hypnotically suggestible than those with a low level of hypnotic suggestibility will incorporate the incorrect information into memory. Hypnotic as compared with waking instruction should enhance this distortion effect by providing a context of testing in which subjects are readily prone to respond positively to suggestions. Eight independent groups of 12 subjects were tested. Separate groups of subjects of high and low suggestibility were presented with misleading or neutral information about a wallet-snatching incident and tested for memory under either waking or hypnotic instruction. Analysis of subjects' memory distortions indicated that suggestibility plays a somewhat different role than has been argued previously. The magnitude of distortion that was observed varied according to the stimulus features that were studied, but hypnotic suggestibility was not associated with the distortion effect. Despite the fact that hypnosis did not enhance recall in any way, subjects were frequently confident that distorted memories recovered under hypnosis were accurate.     

Pseudomemory effects over time in the hypnotic setting

Highly (n = 36), moderately (n = 26), and low (n = 48) susceptible subjects were administered either hypnosis or waking instruction to examine the hypothesis that pseudomemory will occur for hypnotic subjects as long as 2 weeks after suggestions are given for accepting false events. Accuracy and confidence of memory were measured for all subjects, and memory was examined for free recall, structured recall, and recognition. Results indicated persistence of pseudomemory for the 2-week period for both highly and moderately susceptible subjects. Data highlighted the multifaceted operation of skill, contextual, and state instruction factors, and an hypothesis that ambiguity of communication when suggestion is delivered plays a part in the maintenance of pseudomemory over time is offered for further testing.     

Hypnosis, the timing of its introduction, and acceptance of misleading information

Allocated independent sets of 16 Ss to a crossed 2 (level of susceptibility: high, low) x 2 (information: misleading, nonmisleading) x 2 (state instruction: hypnosis, walking) design to examine the prediction that hypnosis will facilitate memory distortion when hypnotic instruction precedes the exposure of Ss to incorrect, misleading information. E. F. Loftus's recognition procedures were used to focus on the predicted effect. Free recall was also examined for memory distortion effects. Results indicated the presence of significant memory distortion for both recognition and free-recall memories. The distortion effects accompanying hypnosis, however, were not reliably greater than those accompanying waking instruction. Results are examined in relation to the operation of multiple parameters affecting memory distortion in hypnosis. Pertinent factors include the procedures for testing the effects of distortion and the level of Ss' aptitude for hypnosis.     

Distignuishing the source of memories reported during prior waking and hypnotic recall attempts

Subjects attempted to identify the occasion on which they first reported particular responses to questions that were asked twice during an experiment on hyphosis and memory 1 week earlier. During this earlier experiment, subjects of high and low hypnotizability had been randomly allocatd to one of two recall test sequences: wake-hypnosis ro wake-wake. Recall improved from the first (R1) to the second test (R2) in a comparable manner for both test sequences, indicating a failure of hypnosis to enhance memory. It is noteworthy that, when later queried about the origins of specific recollections, the majority of subjects exhibited a bias to attribute their responses to R1, regardless of whether hypnosis was used during R2. Moreover, low hypnotizables exposed to the hypnotic procedure and, to a lesser extent, high hypnotizables who recalled both times in the waking condition displayed and exaggerated tendency to overattribute recollections to R1. These data indicate that individuals cannot distinguish between memories retrieved prior to hypnosis and those that occured during hypnosis. Implications for implementing judicial standards regarding hypnosis are discussed.     

Effects of hypnosis and level of processing on repeated recall of line drawings

Moderately susceptible subjects (N = 30) initially judged 30 line drawings of objects for pleasantness (deep processing) and 30 line drawings for visual complexity (shallow processing), after which they were given two immediate recall tests. Following a 48-hr delay, subjects were allocated randomly to hypnosis, simulation, or neutral control conditions and were tested four more times. Subjects produced more correct and incorrect responses over the six trials and gave a higher number of correct responses for deep items than for shallow items. Over the last four trials, hypnosis had no general facilitative effect relative to the other two treatments, but the effect of depth was strongest for hypnotized subjects, who recalled more deep items than did the controls. Finally, both hypnotized and simulating subjects rated their recall as more involuntary and their experimental treatment as more helpful than did the controls. Caution is urged in the forensic use of hypnosis as a retrieval device.     

Social influence and children's event recall and suggestibility

The present study sheds light on interactions between cognitive and social factors affecting children's memory performance and suggestibility in event recall tasks. We examined 251 children, aged 8, 9 and 10 years, and applied a well-known paradigm from social psychology, that is, the social influence of misleading questions was experimentally manipulated through the presence and answering behaviour of an adult confederate. Children's answers about the content of a previously watched film to misleading questions, their accurate statements in their subsequent free recall, as well as performance in a recognition test were assessed. The design also included two control conditions, one in which children answered misleading questions without an adult confederate, and a second one in which no misleading interview was administered but only free recall and recognition. The results document large recall and suggestibility differences between the conditions. Participants of the strong social influence condition answered more conformably to misleading questions and showed a larger effect of memory contagion in recognition. Moreover, there were strong age-related increases in the ability to rely on one's own recollection rather than parroting the confederate's answers. Strong social influence also differentially affected the occurrence of false statements in free recall and errors in the recognition test depending on the children's age.     

Effects of discrete emotions on young children's suggestibility

Two experiments investigated the effects of sadness, anger, and happiness on 4- to 6-year-old children's memory and suggestibility concerning story events. In Experiment 1, children were presented with 3 interactive stories on a video monitor. The stories included protagonists who wanted to give the child a prize. After each story, the child completed a task to try to win the prize. The outcome of the child's effort was manipulated in order to elicit sadness, anger, or happiness. Children's emotions did not affect story recall, but children were more vulnerable to misleading questions about the stories when sad than when angry or happy. In Experiment 2, a story was presented and emotions were elicited using an autobiographical recall task. Children responded to misleading questions and then recalled the story for a different interviewer. Again, children's emotions did not affect the amount of story information recalled correctly, but sad children incorporated more information from misleading questions during recall than did angry or happy children. Sad children's greater suggestibility is discussed in terms of the differing problem-solving strategies associated with discrete emotions.     

Simulating Memory Impairment for Child Sexual Abuse

The current study investigated effects of simulated memory impairment on recall of child sexual abuse (CSA) information. A total of 144 adults were tested for memory of a written CSA scenario in which they role-played as the victim. There were four experimental groups and two testing sessions. During Session 1, participants read a CSA story and recalled it truthfully (Genuine group), omitted CSA information (Omission group), exaggerated CSA information (Commission group), or did not recall the story at all (No Rehearsal group). One week later, at Session 2, all participants were told to recount the scenario truthfully, and their memory was then tested using free recall and cued recall questions. The Session 1 manipulation affected memory accuracy during Session 2. Specifically, compared with the Genuine group's performance, the Omission, Commission, or No Rehearsal groups' performance was characterized by increased omission and commission errors and decreased reporting of correct details. Victim blame ratings (i.e., victim responsibility and provocativeness) and participant gender predicted increased error and decreased accuracy, whereas perpetrator blame ratings predicted decreased error and increased accuracy. Findings are discussed in relation to factors that may affect memory for CSA information. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An independent replication of the effectiveness of the cognitive interview

The cognitive interview developed by Geiselman and co-workers is a set of memory retrieval aids to enhance recall in memory tasks such as eyewitness reports. This research is a replication of the study of Geiselman, Fischer, Firstenberg, Hutton, Sullivan, Avetissian and Prosk (1984) with a German version of the cognitive interview. Twenty-nine subjects participated and saw a short film in an incidental learning situation. Approximately 6 days later the participants were questioned about one scene of the film. Fourteen subjects received the cognitive interview instructions and 15 were questioned without special instructions. First, subjects gave a written free report of the scene and subsequently answered more specific questions concerning details. The results clearly indicate that the cognitive interview enhances memory retrieval in free recall conditions but this effect is reduced to specific questions. The effects are discussed in terms of a possible underlying memory organization and the use of retrieval strategies.     

Differences and similarities in event recall and suggestibility between children and adults in Germany and the United States

Children (5-6 year olds, 7-8 year olds, 9-10 year olds) and adults from Germany and the United States were shown a brief video of a theft. One week later, participants were asked to give a free narrative of an observed event (free recall), followed either by sets of misleading or unbiased questions, and finally they were given a three-choice recognition question for each queried item. German participants of all ages had higher levels of correct free recall than did American participants. American adults and 9-10 year olds gave more correct responses to the open-ended unbiased questions than did their German counterparts. Germans of all ages made more correct responses to the misleading questions, whereas national differences, favoring the Germans, for incorrect response to misleading questions were restricted to the 5-6 year olds. National differences were interpreted as reflecting possible differences in strategic abilities, exposure to formal instruction, and the degree to which children experience self-directed, autonomous learning opportunities.     

Developmental Patterns of Eyewitness Responses to Repeated and Increasingly Suggestive Questions

Kindergarten, Grade 2, Grade 4, and adult subjects viewed a brief video of two children arguing about the use of a bicycle. One week later subjects were asked for their free recall of the events in the video followed by sets of hierarchically arranged, increasingly suggestive questions that suggested a correct (positive-leading), an incorrect (misleading), or no specific (unbiased-leading) answer, with the final level of questioning for each item being a three-alternative multiple-choice question. Correct free recall varied with age, with the kindergarten and Grade 2 children generally following the lead of the first-level questions more so than the older subjects. Older children were as accurate as adults in responding to questions about the central items, but not so for noncentral items. Developmental differences were found in responses to repeated suggestive questioning, with kindergarten children following misleading questions and changing answers more often than older subjects. On the final, multiple-choice questions, kindergarten children were able to provide the correct answer as often as they had to the initial questions, despite intervening errors. Findings are discussed in terms of the type of questions presented, the repetition factors, and the opportunities for subjects changing their answers in response to subsequent questions about the same item.     

Directed forgetting and posthypnotic amnesia: information processing and social contexts

In three experiments we compared posthypnotic amnesia (PHA) with directed forgetting (DF), evaluating subjects' hypnotic susceptibility, hypnotized or not. Experiment 1 suggested that the memory processes in PHA and DF were not the same. Low and high susceptibility subjects responded differently in the two contexts. Experiment 2 demonstrated a context effect for highly susceptible subjects: They showed the usual DF response outside hypnosis but not during hypnosis. Experiment 3 showed that high and low susceptibility subjects responded similarly to DF instructions outside hypnosis, eliminating the susceptibility as an important variable in the DF response. We concluded: (a) The interaction of context and susceptibility was the important determinant of unusual DF responses for high susceptibles, and (b) information processing concepts are too limited to explain PHA and perhaps DF. Theories that include interactions appear necessary for an accurate understanding of hypnotic phenomena and perhaps some phenomena usually focused on by cognitive psychology.     

Literalism as a marker of hypnotic "trance": disconfirming evidence

The responses given by highly hypnotizable, hypnotic subjects and those of unhypnotizable subjects who simulated hypnosis to questions of the type, "Do you mind telling me your name?" and "Do you mind standing up?" were contrasted. The purpose was to examine Erickson's (1980) assertion that literalism (answering "yes" or "no" verbally or nonverbally without any cognitive elaboration) is a marker of hypnotic "trance." Simulators exhibited a greater rate of literalism than hypnotic "virtuosos" (i.e., extreme scorers on both group and individual hypnotizability measures). Hypnotized subjects and nonhypnotized subjects approached in the campus library responded comparably. Because less than a third of hypnotic virtuosos responded literally, our results strongly refuted Erickson's assertion that literalism is a cognitive feature of hypnosis.     

The effect of one experience upon the recall of another

An exploratory experiment was made to show how one experience may exert an influence upon the recall of another, and how both may lose their separate identities in memory, to become merged into what Bartlett has described as an active organization of related experiences. The original material was a story, and the experience interpolated between it and its recall was a picture which illustrated part of it, in some respects correctly, in others incorrectly. Some subjects were asked to recall the story, others the picture, after from one to four weeks, or in a few cases a year.

The picture was viewed under the influence of the attitudes induced by the story. These determined its selection from a number of other unrelated pictures, to be perceived as a related experience. In consequence only few details gained attention, and these were interpreted in terms of the attitudes induced by the story, in some cases contrary to the meaning given to them by the rest of the picture. Other details without significance in the theme of the story were neglected. In its turn, seeing the picture favoured the recall of some aspects of the theme of the story, details not reinforced by the picture tending to be left out in recall. Many picture details intruded into the reproductions of the story. This tendency was progressive, and at the end of a year picture and story details were not separated. Especially, the picture brought about changes in the points of emphasis in the story.     

Myths and misconceptions about hypnosis and suggestion: Separating fact and fiction

We present 21 prominent myths and misconceptions about hypnosis in order to promulgate accurate information and to highlight questions for future research. We argue that these myths and misconceptions have (a) fostered a skewed and stereotyped view of hypnosis among the lay public, (b) discouraged participant involvement in potentially helpful hypnotic interventions, and (c) impeded the exploration and application of hypnosis in scientific and practitioner communities. Myths reviewed span the view that hypnosis produces a trance or special state of consciousness and allied myths on topics related to hypnotic interventions; hypnotic responsiveness and the modification of hypnotic suggestibility; inducing hypnosis; and hypnosis and memory, awareness, and the experience of nonvolition. By demarcating myth from mystery and fact from fiction, and by highlighting what is known as well as what remains to be discovered, the science and practice of hypnosis can be advanced and grounded on a firmer empirical footing.     

Does the nature of the experience influence suggestibility? A study of children's event memory

Two experiments examined the effects of event modality on children's memory and suggestibility. In Experiment 1, 3- and 5-year-old children directly participated in, observed, or listened to a narrative about an event. In an interview immediately after the event, free recall was followed by misleading or leading questions and, in turn, test recall questions. One week later children were reinterviewed. In Experiment 2, 4-year-old children either participated in or listened to a story about an event, either a single time or to a criterion level of learning. Misleading questions were presented either immediately or 1 week after learning, followed by test recall questions. Five-year-old children were more accurate than 3-year-olds and those participating were more accurate than those either observing or listening to a narrative. However, method of assessment, level of event learning, delay to testing, and variables relating to the misled items also influenced the magnitude of misinformation effects.     

Memory impairment and source misattribution in postevent misinformation experiments with short retention intervals

The four experiments reported here provide evidence that (1) misleading postevent suggestions can impair memory for details in a witnessed event and (2) subjects sometimes remember sug-gested details as things seen in the event itself. All four experiments used recall tests in which subjects were warned of the possibility that the postevent information included misleading sug-gestions and were instructed to report both what they witnessed in the event and what was men-tioned in the postevent narrative. Recall of event details was poorer on misled items than on control items, and subjects sometimes misidentified the sources of their recollections. Our re-sults suggest that these findings are not due to guessing or response biases, but rather reflect genuine memory impairment and source monitoring confusions.