Misinformation and warnings in eyewitness testimony: A new testing procedure to differentiate explanations

Abstract

Although psychologists agree that the presentation of misleading post-event information often results in errant recollections, there is disagreement about the explanation as to why this occurs. Some (cf. Loftus, Donders, Hoffman, & Schooler, 1989) believe this misinformation alters the memory trace created by the original information, whereas others (cf. McCloskey & Zaragoza, 1985) have argued that the data do not necessitate this explanation. An experiment, designed to differentiate the various explanations, was conducted. Its critical elements were: (1) a condition with a specific warning presented immediately after the misleading information; and (2) a ranking procedure used at testing. The results suggest multiple traces may exist for a limited period, but not indefinitely.