國立虎尾科技大學 |

Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?/
Author:	O'Donnell, Rachel Anne.
Description:	1 online resource (66 pages)
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 83-12.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International83-12.
Subject:	Cognitive psychology. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798819385326

Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?
O'Donnell, Rachel Anne.

Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation? - 1 online resource (66 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 83-12.

Thesis (M.S.)--Iowa State University, 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Some research indicates that presenting misinformation three times increases eyewitness suggestibility relative to presenting misinformation once (Mitchell & Zaragoza, 1996; Zaragoza et al., 2007). Other research has shown that suggestibility increases when misinformation is given by multiple sources relative to misinformation given from only one source (Walther et al., 2002; Mojtahedi et al., 2018). Accordingly, misinformation presented repeatedly and from multiple sources might increase eyewitness suggestibility relative to misinformation presented once and from one source. The current study examined whether multiple sources (or witnesses) and repetition of misinformation had independent effects on suggestibility. To date, only two prior studies had investigated this question (Foster et al., 2012; Mitchell & Zaragoza, 1996). Foster et al. found that repetition decreased participants' accuracy, but number of sources did not. Experiment 1 attempted to replicate this finding with a factorial design based on Foster et al.'s original conditions. I also included another 1X (one presentation) condition that provided better balance to the experimental design (i.e., the original 1X condition presented the misinformation in only one interview, and the new condition distributed the misinformation among three interviews). Consistent with Foster et al., Experiment 1 showed that three presentations of misinformation (3X condition) reduced accuracy compared to one presentation (1X condition), but source variability had no effect. Experiment 2 attempted to determine whether a lack of source saliency contributed to the null effect of source variability. As such, the mock interviews (which were used to deliver misinformation) were presented as videos featuring different interviewees. Despite this presentation method, there was no effect of source variability in Experiment 2. Furthermore, in contrast to Experiment 1, there was an effect of repetition when the 3X condition was compared to the 1X condition, but not when compared to the 1X distributed condition. As such, I examined the prominence of the repetition effect in the misinformation literature by conducting a small-scale meta-analysis. The results showed that existing studies demonstrate a moderate and significant effect of repetition. Finally, I explored potential explanations for why there was no effect of source and discussed the applied implications of my findings.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798819385326Subjects--Topical Terms:

556029
Cognitive psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Eyewitness suggestibilityIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?
LDR:03909ntm a22004097 4500 001 1147213
005 20240909100726.5
006 m o d
007 cr bn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798819385326
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI29160954
035 $a AAI29160954
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a O'Donnell, Rachel Anne. $3 1472880
245 1 0 $a Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (66 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 83-12.
500 $a Advisor: Chan, Jason C. K.
502 $a Thesis (M.S.)--Iowa State University, 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Some research indicates that presenting misinformation three times increases eyewitness suggestibility relative to presenting misinformation once (Mitchell & Zaragoza, 1996; Zaragoza et al., 2007). Other research has shown that suggestibility increases when misinformation is given by multiple sources relative to misinformation given from only one source (Walther et al., 2002; Mojtahedi et al., 2018). Accordingly, misinformation presented repeatedly and from multiple sources might increase eyewitness suggestibility relative to misinformation presented once and from one source. The current study examined whether multiple sources (or witnesses) and repetition of misinformation had independent effects on suggestibility. To date, only two prior studies had investigated this question (Foster et al., 2012; Mitchell & Zaragoza, 1996). Foster et al. found that repetition decreased participants' accuracy, but number of sources did not. Experiment 1 attempted to replicate this finding with a factorial design based on Foster et al.'s original conditions. I also included another 1X (one presentation) condition that provided better balance to the experimental design (i.e., the original 1X condition presented the misinformation in only one interview, and the new condition distributed the misinformation among three interviews). Consistent with Foster et al., Experiment 1 showed that three presentations of misinformation (3X condition) reduced accuracy compared to one presentation (1X condition), but source variability had no effect. Experiment 2 attempted to determine whether a lack of source saliency contributed to the null effect of source variability. As such, the mock interviews (which were used to deliver misinformation) were presented as videos featuring different interviewees. Despite this presentation method, there was no effect of source variability in Experiment 2. Furthermore, in contrast to Experiment 1, there was an effect of repetition when the 3X condition was compared to the 1X condition, but not when compared to the 1X distributed condition. As such, I examined the prominence of the repetition effect in the misinformation literature by conducting a small-scale meta-analysis. The results showed that existing studies demonstrate a moderate and significant effect of repetition. Finally, I explored potential explanations for why there was no effect of source and discussed the applied implications of my findings.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Cognitive psychology. $3 556029
650 4 $a Law enforcement. $3 593411
650 4 $a Quantitative psychology. $3 1182802
650 4 $a Information science. $3 561178
653 $a Eyewitness suggestibility
653 $a Misinformation effect
653 $a Multiple sources of misinformation
653 $a Repeated misinformation
653 $a Source variability
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0632
690 $a 0206
690 $a 0723
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Iowa State University. $b Psychology. $3 1188384
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 83-12.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29160954 $z click for full text (PQDT)