It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Accuracy of memory is critical in legal and clinical contexts. These contexts are often linked with high levels of emotional distress and social sources that can provide potentially distorting information about stressful events. This study investigated how distress was associated with susceptibility to misinformation about a trauma analogue event. We employed an experimental design whereby in Phase 1, participants (N = 243, aged 20–72, 122 females, 117 males, 4 gender diverse) watched a trauma film (car crash) and heard an audio summary that contained misinformation (misled items), true reminders (consistent items), and no reminders (control items) about the film. Participants rated their total distress, and symptoms of avoidance, intrusions, and hyperarousal, in response to the film. They then completed cued recall, recognition, and source memory tasks. One week later in Phase 2, participants (N = 199) completed the same measures again. Generalised linear mixed models were used. A significant misinformation effect was found, and importantly, participants with higher distress levels showed a smaller misinformation effect, owing to especially poor memory for consistent items compared to their less distressed counterparts. Distress was also associated with improved source memory for misled items. Avoidance of the film’s reminders was associated with a smaller misinformation effect during immediate retrieval and a larger misinformation effect during delayed retrieval. Findings suggest that distress is associated with decreased susceptibility to misinformation in some cases, but also associated with poorer memory accuracy in general. Limitations are discussed, and the need for further research is highlighted.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Monash University, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Melbourne, Australia (GRID:grid.1002.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7857)
2 University of Exeter, Law School, Exeter, UK (GRID:grid.8391.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8024)
3 University of Warwick, Department of Psychology, Coventry, UK (GRID:grid.7372.1) (ISNI:0000 0000 8809 1613)