Interviewing witnesses: the effect of forced confabulation on event memory

Factors affecting the forced confabulation effect: a meta-analysis of laboratory studies

During police investigations, interviewees are sometimes forced to confabulate a response to questions for which they don't know the answer. In this registered report, we conducted a three-level meta-analysis to examine whether forcing people to confabulate an answer to these questions can lead to false memories for the confabulated details and/or events (i.e., forced confabulation effect). Results showed that forced confabulation indeed led to the production of false memories. Qualitative reviews of studies suggested that the forced confabulation effect is enhanced after receiving confirmatory feedback. Moreover, we found evidence that longer delays between the forced confabulation phase and the final memory task are necessary to observe the forced confabulation effect for entire events. However, caution is needed when interpreting the forced confabulation effect. Specifically, our moderator analyses revealed that voluntarily produced confabulation led to more false memories than forced confabulation. Also, our exploratory analysis indicated that the forced confabulation effect was mainly observed in within-subject designs. Taken together, our meta-analysis supports the notion that forcing participants to confabulate can lead them to later report such confabulations as part of the truth. Nonetheless, caution is warranted because this effect might be due to the introduction of misinformation through asking unanswerable questions.

Research on the Effects of Lying on Memory: A Scientometric Analysis and a Call for New Studies

Research on the effects of lying and memory is increasingly attracting empirical attention. In the current manuscript, a scientometric analysis was carried out on the mnemonic consequences of lying. This analysis took into account 70 published articles extracted from Scopus and Web of Science databases from 1998 to 2021. A scientometric analysis was conducted in order to visualize the state of the art on this line of research (i.e., authors, countries, institutions, journals, and co-citations). Additionally, a keywords’ cluster analysis was executed to investigate the main keywords used in the published papers. Based on the keywords’ cluster analysis, we identified the main aims and critical issues of the reviewed papers. The United States and the Netherlands are the two most productive countries into the effects of lying on memory. The top five authors are mainly from European countries and wrote from 6 to 15 articles. The cluster analysis detected three clusters of keywords. The critical issues of this line of research are mainly related to the generalizability of the achieved findings for real situations, a lack of a direct control of the manipulation adopted, and a need of additional measures. The current analysis provides a comprehensive overview and understanding of existing research on the effects of lying on memory and provides possible future directions of this research domain.

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and confabulation in psycholegal settings: A beginner's guide for criminal justice, forensic mental health, and legal interviewers

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) are neurodevelopmental/neurobehavioral conditions caused by prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE). Impairments caused by PAE contribute to the over-representation of individuals with FASD in the United States juvenile and adult criminal justice systems. These same impairments can equally impact on individuals with FASD who are witnesses to or victims of crime who also have to navigate the complexities of the criminal justice system. Difficulties include increased susceptibility to confabulation throughout the legal process that, in turn, can contribute to increased rates of poor outcomes including false confessions and wrongful convictions. Individuals with FASD are particularity at risk of confabulation when they are subjected to tactics, such as stressful and anxiety-provoking situations, threats, and leading, suggestive, or coercive questioning. Many professionals in the forensic context are unfamiliar with FASD or related confabulation risk and may unintentionally utilize tactics that intensify impacts of pre-existing impairment. This article serves as a beginner's guide for professionals working in criminal justice settings by (a) providing research-based overviews of FASD and confabulation, (b) describing how FASD may lead to confabulation, and (c) suggesting ways that professionals can modify protocols when interacting with individuals with FASD. Suggestions in this article hold the potential to decrease the risk of confabulation in the criminal justice system and decrease problematic outcomes, such as false confessions and wrongful convictions among individuals with FASD.

The Impact of Emotion and Sex on Fabrication and False Memory Formation

The aim of the present study was to examine how negative emotion and sex affect self-generated errors as in fabrication set-up and later false recognition of those errors. In total, 120 university students volunteered to take part in the study. Participants were assigned at random into two equal sized groups (N = 60) depending on the type of event they received (negative emotional or neutral). We expected that fabrication and false recognition would be enhanced for the emotional event compared to the neutral one. We further hypothesized that both the willingness to fabricate and later false recognition would be enhanced for women compared with men. The results partly confirmed the hypotheses. The results showed that emotional valence (negative) affects both the willingness to fabricate about events that never took place, and the recognition of the fabrication as true at a later point. Women and men were equally likely to fabricate but women were more likely to recognize their fabrication, particularly for the emotional event. The results are discussed in the context of prior work.

Why collaboration reduces suggestibility: The role of source-monitoring processes and retrieval strategies

Previous research found that collaboration reduces the tendency to yield to misleading questions. Here, the aim was to determine whether this occurs because collaboration induces a conservative change in response criterion or because it promotes more efficient error-checking strategies. To this purpose, we compared the performance of collaborative and nominal triads in the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale. Critically, we recorded conversations during retrieval, allowing us to compute inclusive scores and analyze retrieval strategies. Confirming previous evidence, results showed that collaborative groups yielded less to leading questions; however, the differences between collaborative and nominal groups in yield 1 were canceled when we took into account questions to which at least one participant in the collaborative group gave in but was corrected by collaborators during the discussion (the so-called inclusive scores). This was not the case for yield 2 and total suggestibility scores. Also, the analysis of retrieval strategies indicated that collaborative groups who used process-focused strategies (such as correction and cross-cueing) to a greater extent were less likely to change their responses after receiving the negative feedback and were less suggestible. We conclude that, while the use of error-checking and process-focused strategies played a role in reducing suggestibility in collaborative groups, the administration of negative feedback induced members of collaborative groups to adopt a more conservative response criterion. These results contribute to the understanding of the conditions that maximize the positive effects of collaborative retrieval. They have implications for policymakers and police practitioners, specifying when and how collaboration might be allowed.

Answering a factual question today increases one's confidence in the same answer tomorrow - independent of fluency

We investigated the cognitive processes that cause confidence to increase. Participants were asked 48 general-knowledge questions either once or three times, without feedback. After 2 min (Experiment 1) or 48 h (Experiment 2) they were asked the same questions again, and rated their confidence. Repeated questioning increased confidence but not accuracy. This increase, which replicated research on episodic memory in the eyewitness literature (e.g., Shaw, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2: 126-146, 1996), occurred even though accuracy was only around 25%. A mediation analysis identified response repetition, but not fluency, as a mechanism underlying growth in confidence. Thus, the basis for confidence judgments appears to be whether one's current response has been generated previously. In sum, answering a factual question increases confidence, but not accuracy, and this happens because learners use response repetition as a cue for confidence judgments.

Long-lasting positive effects of collaborative remembering on false assents to misleading questions

Previous studies showed that collaborative remembering can reduce false memories through a process of mutual error checking, although conclusions were limited by the nature of the memory tasks (very few errors). The present experiments extend these findings to eyewitness memory by using a paradigm designed to increase the frequency of memory errors. Collaborative and nominal pairs viewed a video-clip illustrating a bank robbery, provided an immediate free recall, were forced to confabulate answers to false-event questions, and, after a short- (1 h: Experiment 1) or a long-term delay (1 week: Experiment 2), were administered a yes/no recognition task in which the misleading statements either matched the questions presented in the confabulation phase (answered questions) or not (control questions). Collaborative pairs recalled fewer correct details in the immediate free recall task, replicating the negative effects of collaborative inhibition. Most importantly, in the final recognition test, collaborative pairs were less likely to provide false assents to misleading statements, regardless of whether they had provided a response to the related false-event questions 1 h or 1 week earlier. Our results suggest that collaboration can increase the eyewitnesses' tendency to check the accuracy of others' responses and reject false memories through discussion.

Accuracy of seizure semiology obtained from first-time seizure witnesses

Background

Little is known of how accurately a first-time seizure witness can provide reliable details of a semiology. Our goal was to determine how accurately first-time seizure witnesses could identify key elements of an epileptic event that would aid the clinician in diagnosing a seizure.

Methods

A total of 172 participants over 17 years of age, with a mean (sd) of 33.12 (13.2) years and 49.4% female, composed of two groups of community dwelling volunteers, were shown two different seizure videos; one with a focal seizure that generalized (GSV), and the other with a partial seizure that did not generalize (PSV). Participants were first asked about what they thought was the event that had occurred. They then went through a history-taking scenario by an assessor using a battery of pre-determined questions about involvement of major regions: the head, eyes, mouth, upper limbs, lower limbs, or change in consciousness. Further details were then sought about direction of movement in the eyes, upper and lower limbs, the side of limb movements and the type of movements in the upper and lower limbs. Analysis was with descriptive statistics and logistic regression.

Results

One hundred twenty-two (71.4%) identified the events as seizure or epilepsy. The accuracy of identifying major areas of involvement ranged from 60 to 89.5%. Horizontal head movements were significantly more recognized in the PSV, while involvement of the eyes, lateralization of arm movement, type of left arm movement, leg involvement, and lateralization of leg movement were significantly more recognized in the GSV. Those shown the GSV were more likely to recognize the event as "seizure" or "epilepsy" than those shown the PSV; 78 (84.8%) vs 44 (55.7%), (OR 0.22, p < 0.0001). Younger age was also associated with correct recognition (OR 0.96, P 0.049). False positive responses ranged from 2.5 to 32.5%.

Conclusion

First-time witnesses can identify important elements more than by chance alone, and are more likely to associate generalized semiologies with seizures or epilepsy than partial semiologies. However, clinicians still need to navigate the witness’s account carefully for additional information since routine questioning could result in a misleading false positive answer.

Learning to Detect Deception from Evasive Answers and Inconsistencies across Repeated Interviews: A Study with Lay Respondents and Police Officers

Previous research has shown that inconsistencies across repeated interviews do not indicate deception because liars deliberately tend to repeat the same story. However, when a strategic interview approach that makes it difficult for liars to use the repeat strategy is used, both consistency and evasive answers differ significantly between truth tellers and liars, and statistical software (binary logistic regression analyses) can reach high classification rates (Masip et al., 2016b). Yet, if the interview procedure is to be used in applied settings the decision process will be made by humans, not statistical software. To address this issue, in the current study, 475 college students (Experiment 1) and 142 police officers (Experiment 2) were instructed to code and use consistency, evasive answers, or a combination or both before judging the veracity of Masip et al.'s (2016b) interview transcripts. Accuracy rates were high (60% to over 90%). Evasive answers yielded higher rates than consistency, and the combination of both these cues produced the highest accuracy rates in identifying both truthful and deceptive statements. Uninstructed participants performed fairly well (around 75% accuracy), apparently because they spontaneously used consistency and evasive answers. The pattern of results was the same among students, all officers, and veteran officers only, and shows that inconsistencies between interviews and evasive answers reveal deception when a strategic interview approach that hinders the repeat strategy is used.

Using the regulation of accuracy to study performance when the correct answer is not known

We examined memory performance in multiple-choice questions when correct answers were not always present. How do participants answer when they are aware that the correct alternative may not be present? To answer this question we allowed participants to decide on the number of alternatives in their final answer (the plurality option), and whether they wanted to report or withhold their answer (report option). We also studied the memory benefits when both the plurality and the report options were available. In two experiments participants watched a crime and then answered questions with five alternatives. Half of the questions were presented with the correct alternative and half were not. Participants selected one alternative and rated confidence, then selected three alternatives and again rated confidence, and finally indicated whether they preferred the answer with one or with three alternatives (plurality option). Lastly, they decided whether to report or withhold the answer (report option). Results showed that participants' confidence in their selections was higher, that they chose more single answers, and that they preferred to report more often when the correct alternative was presented. We also attempted to classify a posteriori questions as either presented with or without the correct alternative from participants' selection. Classification was better than chance, and encouraging, but the forensic application of the classification technique is still limited since there was a large percentage of responses that were incorrectly classified. Our results also showed that the memory benefits of both plurality and report options overlap.

Strategic Interviewing to Detect Deception: Cues to Deception across Repeated Interviews

Previous deception research on repeated interviews found that liars are not less consistent than truth tellers, presumably because liars use a “repeat strategy” to be consistent across interviews. The goal of this study was to design an interview procedure to overcome this strategy. Innocent participants (truth tellers) and guilty participants (liars) had to convince an interviewer that they had performed several innocent activities rather than committing a mock crime. The interview focused on the innocent activities (alibi), contained specific central and peripheral questions, and was repeated after 1 week without forewarning. Cognitive load was increased by asking participants to reply quickly. The liars’ answers in replying to both central and peripheral questions were significantly less accurate, less consistent, and more evasive than the truth tellers’ answers. Logistic regression analyses yielded classification rates ranging from around 70% (with consistency as the predictor variable), 85% (with evasive answers as the predictor variable), to over 90% (with an improved measure of consistency that incorporated evasive answers as the predictor variable, as well as with response accuracy as the predictor variable). These classification rates were higher than the interviewers’ accuracy rate (54%).

The Impact of Multifaceted Questions on Eyewitness Accuracy Following Forced Fabrication Interviews

Lawyers will frequently use complex-question forms, such as multifaceted questions (single questions that contain both a true and a false proposition), when cross-examining witnesses, and prior research has shown that use of such questions reduces testimonial accuracy. The present study extends this research by using a forced fabrication paradigm (Chrobak & Zaragoza, 2008) to assess how multifaceted questions might affect eyewitness suggestibility after exposure to misleading post-event information. Consistent with prior studies, the use of multifaceted questions led to lower accuracy than simple questions. The novel finding was that multifaceted questions caused larger impairments in performance among fabrication participants (who had earlier been suggestively interviewed), than in control participants (who had not). We also provide preliminary evidence that the impairment caused by multifaceted questions is due to both (a) having to consider two propositions simultaneously, and (b) the shift in question focus from the fabricated event to a true event.

An examination of "don't know" responses in forensic interviews with children

Most experimental studies examining the use of pre-interview instructions (ground rules) show that children say "I don't know" more often when they have been encouraged to do so when appropriate. However, children's "don't know" responses have not been studied in more applied contexts, such as in investigative interviews. In the present study, 76 transcripts of investigative interviews with allegedly abused children revealed patterns of "don't know" responding, as well as interviewers' reactions to these responses. Instructions to say "I don't know" when appropriate did not affect the frequency with which children gave these responses. Interviewers rejected "don't know" responses nearly 30% of the time, and typically continued to ask about the same topic using more risky questions. Children often answered these follow-up questions even though they had previously indicated that they lacked the requested information. There was no evidence that "don't know" responses indicated reluctance to talk about abuse. Implications for forensic interviewers are discussed.

Inoculation or antidote? The effects of cognitive interview timing on false memory for forcibly fabricated events

This study examined whether a cognitive interview (CI) can counteract the effects of suggestive interviews involving forced fabrication. College students witnessed a filmed event and were later forced to fabricate answers to misleading questions about the event. All witnesses were interviewed with a non-leading CI or free recall (FR) either before or after the forced fabrication phase. A week later participants completed a recognition and source monitoring (SM) test of video content. Relative to FR, the CI administered before the forced fabrication interview increased reports of correct details and reduced false assents to fabricated items. A CI after resulted in false memory rates comparable to the FR group. Early interviews using CI techniques may protect against memory loss and misinformation effects.