Memory for central and peripheral actions and props after varied post‐event presentation

Abstract

Purpose. The effects of varying post‐event information (information was unchanged from the original event, misleading or added an incorrect detail) on memory for central and peripheral actions and props in a crime scene were examined.Methods. After pre‐testing 105 undergraduates to obtain centrality ratings for target items (actions and props), 300 additional undergraduates were presented with slides of a crime followed by a narrative in which one target item was unchanged from the original presentation, one was changed (misleading), and one had an incorrect detail added. Participants were tested using one of four memory tests: item recognition, source recognition, cued recall or sentence completion (an indirect memory test).Results. Misinformation effects were found for all four dependent measures. People were more resistant to misleading central than peripheral information, and readily accepted incorrect added details in recognition tests, but rarely generated them in recall or sentence completion.Conclusions. Two major conclusions can be drawn. Peripheral items are more strongly influenced by misleading information than are central items, and those who provide a free account of what they witness are unlikely to include details, but may accept incorrect details when questioned. Implications for eyewitness testimony and future research in eyewitness memory are discussed.