東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Does Source Variability of Misinform...

O'Donnell, Rachel Anne.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

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

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?/
Author:	O'Donnell, Rachel Anne.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2022,
Description:	66 p.
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 83-12.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International83-12.
Subject:	Cognitive psychology. -
Online resource:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29160954
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? - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2022 - 66 p.

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

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

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.

ISBN: 9798819385326Subjects--Topical Terms:

523881
Cognitive psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Eyewitness suggestibility

Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?
LDR:03684nmm a2200397 4500 001 2399117
005 20240909100726.5
006 m o d
007 cr#unu||||||||
008 251215s2022 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798819385326
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI29160954
035 $a AAI29160954
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a O'Donnell, Rachel Anne. $0 (orcid)0000-0001-5579-6366 $3 3769082
245 1 0 $a Does Source Variability of Misinformation Increase Eyewitness Suggestibility Independently of Repetition of Misinformation?
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2022
300 $a 66 p.
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.
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.
590 $a School code: 0097.
650 4 $a Cognitive psychology. $3 523881
650 4 $a Law enforcement. $3 607408
650 4 $a Quantitative psychology. $3 2144748
650 4 $a Information science. $3 554358
653 $a Eyewitness suggestibility
653 $a Misinformation effect
653 $a Multiple sources of misinformation
653 $a Repeated misinformation
653 $a Source variability
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0632
690 $a 0206
690 $a 0723
710 2 $a Iowa State University. $b Psychology. $3 1022617
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 83-12.
790 $a 0097
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2022
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29160954