Children’s suggestion-induced omission errors are not caused by memory erasure
Introduction
Studies have shown that suggestive information can result in omission errors (i.e., leaving out details) in both children and adults (e.g., Candel, Hayne, Strange, & Prevoo, 2009). So far, no study has examined whether suggestion-induced omission errors reflect a pure memory phenomenon (i.e., erasure of correct traces). The question we addressed in the current study is whether erasure of memory traces underlies children’s omission errors.
Numerous studies have demonstrated that when exposed to suggestion both children and adults can develop false memories of events and details (e.g., Davis and Loftus, 2007, Otgaar et al., 2009, Sutherland and Hayne, 2001). Research also shows that such commission errors (i.e., false memories) are similar to veridical memories in terms of subjective ratings, and in their behavioral concomitants such as reaction times and food preferences (e.g., Bernstein et al., 2005, Geraerts et al., 2008, Lindsay et al., 2004, Loftus et al., 1989, McNally et al., 2004). This indicates that commission errors are sustained by memory traces – albeit incorrect ones- and cannot be explained solely as manifestations of social pressure (e.g., conformity).
Few studies have examined how suggestion promotes omission errors in children. In one of the earlier studies on this topic (Pezdek & Roe, 1997), four- and ten-year old children were touched on their shoulder by the experimenter. In the omission condition, children were presented with false information stating that the event had not occurred. This manipulation did not increase the proportion of children denying that they been touched as compared to the no-suggestion control group. This led the authors to conclude that children’s memories are largely immune to attempts of erasure by suggestion.
Other authors, however, were more successful in their attempts of suggesting that perceived details were not presented. For example, Candel and colleagues (2009) examined how misleading information concerning details (i.e., falsely suggesting certain information was present or absent) would impact children’s omission (i.e., failure to report) and commission errors. These authors found that omission and commission errors could be induced at a comparable rate (see also Williams et al., 2002, Wright et al., 2001).
Thus, it is possible to create omission errors with false suggestions. But do social phenomena (e.g., compliance with suggestions provided by adults) underlie these errors? Or are suggestion-induced omission errors the result of memory traces that have been erased or – to use a less dramatic description – have become inaccessible? The latter possibility comes close to concepts like repression and amnesia and it has drawn the attention of researchers interested in delayed disclosure of child abuse (e.g., Sjöberg & Lindblad, 2002). Meanwhile, as Wright and colleagues (2001, p. 481) write: “little empirical attention has been focused on the question of whether a perpetrator, or others, could act in such a way to make a memory less likely to be retrieved” (see also Wright & Loftus, 1998).
The current study sought to test whether memory erasure underlies children’s omission errors. Seven-year old children were instructed to remove three pieces of clothing from a puppet. Next, an interviewer told children that they could not have removed one particular item and that their memory of this was incorrect. Specifically, they were provided with false evidence suggesting that they took off two pieces. During two follow-up interviews with a one week interval in-between, children had to indicate which pieces of clothing they had removed. After the second interview, children had to complete a choice reaction time task. During this task, different items of clothing were displayed, including the item that the child falsely denied to have removed (i.e., omitted item), items that were not removed, and items that the child admitted to have removed. For each item, children had to indicate whether it had been removed by pressing one of two buttons, one labeled yes and one labeled No.
One may safely assume that children in the present study had to make source monitoring decisions (Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993) in which they had to decide between an internal and external source (i.e., reality monitoring decisions). So, they had to choose whether they themselves removed the two pieces of clothing or whether the interviewer suggested it to them.
The rationale behind the choice reaction time task is that if the memory trace for removing the omitted item is erased or inaccessible, it should be processed identical to the items that were never removed. Given that they share the same response button (the no-button), no difference in behavioral data is expected between these types of items. If, on the other hand, behavioral data differ between items that have never been removed and omitted items, this indicates interference, meaning that the memory has not been erased. In that case, the omission errors must be attributed to other mechanisms than erasure such as compliance. Importantly, lying about removing two pieces of clothing would also result in behavioral interference.
Section snippets
Participants
The current study included 75 elementary school children (Mage = 7.23, SD = 0.48, range 6–8). These children served as our omission-suggestion group. An extra group of 24 children was included as control group (Mage = 7.63, SD = 0.65, range 6–9). All children obtained informed consent from their parents and schools. All children were given a small present for their participation. The study was approved by the standing ethical committee of the Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht
Results
To make sure that children’s responses were only related to our omission suggestion and not due to other factors (e.g., forgetting), data from children who did not correctly report the removal admitted items were excluded from subsequent analyses (see also Otgaar, Candel, Smeets, & Merckelbach, in press). At Interview 2, 32% (n = 24) of the children failed to mention the pertinent piece of clothing and correctly indicated to have removed the other two pieces of clothing. Only these 24 children
Discussion
Research (e.g., Lindsay et al., 2004, Loftus et al., 1989) indicates that suggestion can create actual memory distortions such that people come to remember never-experienced details or events (i.e., false memories). This study demonstrates that suggestion-based omission errors belong to a different class. In more general terms, our findings suggest that source monitoring disruptions (Johnson et al., 1993) do not fully explicate suggestion-based omission errors. Source monitoring refers to the
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by a grant to Ingrid Candel from the Netherlands Organisation of Scientific Research (NWO), Grant number 400-05-015. We wish to thank Maya Wijnen, Yoanne Spoormans, and Lisanne Pols for their assistance in the data collection.
References (21)
- et al.
The P300 is sensitive to concealed face recognition
International Journal of Psychophysiology
(2007) - et al.
Age-related changes in the misinformation effect
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
(2001) - et al.
Making memories: The influence of joint encoding on later recall by young children
Consciousness & Cognition
(1994) - et al.
How misinformation alters memories
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
(1998) - et al.
False memories about food can lead to food avoidance
Social Cognition
(2005) - et al.
The effect of suggestion on children’s recognition memory for seen and unseen details
Psychology, Crime, & Law
(2009) - et al.
Suggestibility of the child witness: A historical review and synthesis
Psychological Bulletin
(1993) - Davis, D., Loftus, E. F. (2007). Internal and external sources of misinformation in adult witness memory. In M. P....
- et al.
The truth will out: Interrogative polygraphy (“lie detection”) with event-related brain potentials
Psychophysiology
(1991) - et al.
Lasting false beliefs and their behavioral consequences
Psychological Science
(2008)
Cited by (8)
External and internal influences yield similar memory effects: the role of deception and suggestion
2023, Frontiers in PsychologyCan suggestions of non-occurrence lead to claims that witnessed events did not happen?
2022, Journal of General PsychologyPutting children's memory and suggestibility in their place: An analysis considering person, topic, and context
2017, Finding the Truth in the Courtroom: Dealing with Deception, Lies, and MemoriesSocial psychological aspects of health and disease in women with breast cancer
2015, Ceskoslovenska PsychologieExperimentally evoking nonbelieved memories for childhood events
2013, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition
- 1
Ingrid Candel also works at the judicial youth institution “Keerpunt”, The Netherlands.