Suggested false memories of a non-existent film: forensically relevant individual differences in the crashing memories paradigm

Eric Rassin*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
45 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

There is ample evidence to suggest that posing leading questions is dangerous, in that it may elicit compliant responses that are not necessarily accurate. Further, suggestive questioning is considered to possibly result in the development of false memories, implied in the suggestion. [Crombag, H. F. M., Wagenaar, W. A., & van Koppen, P. J. (1996). Crashing memories and the problem of ‘source monitoring’. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199604)10:2<95::AID-ACP366>3.0.CO;2-#] introduced a crashing memories paradigm in which participants are asked a single leading question about a non-existent film. The present research sought to replicate the false-memory-eliciting effect of the crashing memory induction. Further, we sought to explore associations with forensically relevant personality traits, particularly acquiescence, compliance, and suggestibility. In two studies, a significant minority of participants endorsed the leading question about the non-existent film (25.7%, and 38% respectively). We found no support for an association with acquiescence or compliance, but suggestibility was associated with the development of false memories.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1205-1211
Number of pages7
JournalMemory
Volume30
Issue number9
Early online date7 Jun 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Suggested false memories of a non-existent film: forensically relevant individual differences in the crashing memories paradigm'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this