Arguing against yourself : exploring the relationship between conflicting episodic memories.

Abstract

The current study is an attempt to evaluate how participants' memory is altered by information either congruent or incongruent to their original testimony. False memory research consistently shows that exposure to post-event information affects how a specific memory is recalled. However, these manipulations are given without receiving any testimony from the participants. This is a two-part study requiring participants to return a week after their first participation to answer questions based on their testimony. Initial accuracy of statements did not differ between the misinformation and control conditions. In addition, no differences were found between conditions on responses regarding the control questions; however, when misinformation was present, a different pattern emerged. Participants significantly agreed with misinformation more than they denied it. These results varied significantly from responses to the control statements. In addition, whether the initial statement was accurate or inaccurate affected how participants' responded to the misinformation. Confidence was overall lower for manipulated statements, indicating the willingness to testify even during uncertainty.