Detecting misinformation can improve memory later on

January 3, 2017, Association for Psychological Science
Credit: Association for Psychological Science

Exposure to false information about an event usually makes it more difficult for people to recall the original details, but new research suggests that there may be times when misinformation actually boosts memory. Research published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, shows that people who actually notice that the misinformation is inconsistent with the original event have better memory for the event compared with people who never saw the misinformation in the first place.

"Our experiments show that misinformation can sometimes enhance memory rather than harm it," says psychological scientist Adam Putnam of Carleton College, lead author of the research. "These findings are important because they help explain why misinformation effects occur sometimes but not at other times - if people notice that the misinformation isn't accurate then they won't have a false memory."

In their first experiment, Putnam and colleagues had 72 undergraduate participants view six shows, each of which contained 50 photos portraying a particular event. After looking through the slide shows, the participants completed an unrelated "distractor" task for about five minutes and then read narrative descriptions for each slide in the previous slide shows.

For example, if the slide showed a thief finding $1 bills in a car, the description might be consistent (e.g., "He examined the bills, and saw they were all $1 bills"), neutral (e.g., "He examined the bills and saw they were all US currency"), or inconsistent (e.g., "He examined the bills and saw that they were all $20 bills") with the slide show.

After reading the descriptions and completing another distractor task, the participant then answered multiple-choice questions about what they remembered from the original slide shows, such as "What kind of bills were in the car?" The responses included a correct option ($1 bills), an incorrect option with misinformation from the narrative ($20 bills), or a different incorrect option ($5 bills). After making their selection, participants reported whether they had noticed any discrepancies between the original slide show and the narratives.

True to a general misinformation effect, people were most likely to choose the misinformation response when the detail in the narrative was inconsistent with the slide show.

But when participants reported remembering a change between the slide shows and the narrative, this deficit disappeared: Participants were more likely to select the correct response after seeing misinformation compared with seeing a neutral detail.

And when they reported that the narrative had contradicted the slide, participants were less likely to select the incorrect misinformation response for details that were inconsistent in the narrative compared with those that were neutral.

Although exposure to misinformation seemed to impair memory for the correct detail, detecting and remembering misinformation in the narrative seemed to improve participants' recognition later on.

A second experiment produced similar results, and additional analyses showed that how memorable a detail was seemed to make a difference. Details that were less memorable, relatively speaking, were more vulnerable to the misinformation effect.

These findings suggest that the relationship between misinformation and memory is more complex than we might have thought—mere exposure to misinformation doesn't automatically cue the effect:

"Classic interference theory in memory suggests that change is almost always bad for memory, but our study is one really clear example of how change can help memory in the right circumstances," Putnam explains.

"People may learn about false research and walk away thinking that false memories can easily be implanted about all sorts of events- that we're constantly remembering things that never happened," says Putnam. "Our research helps in showing that although false memories can occur with some regularity, it isn't a sure thing by any means."

Explore further: Half of people believe fake facts

More information: A. L. Putnam et al, When Misinformation Improves Memory: The Effects of Recollecting Change, Psychological Science (2016). DOI: 10.1177/0956797616672268

Related Stories

Half of people believe fake facts

December 7, 2016
Many people are prone to 'remembering' events that never happened, according to new research by the University of Warwick.

Misinformation: Report shows why it sticks and how to fix it

September 19, 2012
Childhood vaccines do not cause autism. Barack Obama was born in the United States. Global warming is confirmed by science. And yet, many people believe claims to the contrary.

Sydney study finds false memories are common

August 9, 2010
Memories can't be trusted and become contaminated when people discuss their memories of an event with others, according to a University of Sydney study.

Eyewitness memory susceptible to misinformation after testing

February 8, 2011
(PhysOrg.com) -- Last week, the Orlando Sentinel newspaper reported that Palm Beach County, Fla., law enforcement is working to develop a consistent set of rules for eyewitnesses, hoping it will help prevent false convictions. ...

Why we fall prey to misinformation

August 23, 2016
Even when we know better, we often rely on inaccurate or misleading information to make future decisions. But why are we so easily influenced by false statements such as "vaccinations cause autism" or "30 million illegal ...

Collaboration between media and medical journals often leads to misinformation and hysteria

December 8, 2016
When flawed clinical research is reported in the media with hype and sensationalism, it has the potential to have a devastating effect on patients, physicians, the scientific community and eventually society as a whole.

Recommended for you

Study shows how bias can influence people estimating the ages of other people

October 17, 2018
A trio of researchers from the University of New South Wales and Western Sydney University has discovered some of the factors involved when people make errors in estimating the ages of other people. In their paper published ...

Infants are more likely to learn when with a peer

October 16, 2018
Infants are more likely to learn from on-screen instruction when paired with another infant as opposed to viewing the lesson alone, according to a new study.

Researchers use brain cells in a dish to study genetic origins of schizophrenia

October 16, 2018
A study in Biological Psychiatry has established a new analytical method for investigating the complex genetic origins of mental illnesses using brain cells that are grown in a dish from human embryonic stem cells. Researchers ...

Income and wealth affect the mental health of Australians, study shows

October 16, 2018
Australians who have higher incomes and greater wealth are more likely to experience better mental health throughout their lives, new research led by the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre has found.

Linguistic red flags from Facebook posts can predict future depression diagnoses

October 15, 2018
In any given year, depression affects more than 6 percent of the adult population in the United States—some 16 million people—but fewer than half receive the treatment they need. What if an algorithm could scan social ...

Early changes to synapse gene regulation may cause Alzheimer's disease

October 15, 2018
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia, involving memory loss and a reduction in cognitive abilities. Patients with AD develop multiple abnormal protein structures in their brains that are thought to ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.