Memory for central and peripheral actions and props after varied post-event presentation

Legal and Criminological Psychology

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 321-346

  Heath, Wendy P ^a   Erickson, James R ^a  

^a RIDER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; COLLEGE STUDENT; CRIME; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION; LANGUAGE; MEMORY; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECALL; RECOGNITION; TASK PERFORMANCE; WITNESS;

EID: 0031717681     PISSN: 13553259     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8333.1998.tb00369.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Battig, W. F. & Montague, W. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 80, (3, Part 2)
2. Bell, B. E. & Loftus, E. F. (1988). Degree of detail of eyewitness testimony and mock juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1171-1192.
3. Bell, B. E. & Loftus, E. F. (1989). Trivial persuasion in the courtroom: The power of (a few) minor details. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 669-679.
4. Belli, R. F. (1989). Influences of misleading postevent information: Misinformation interferences and acceptance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 72-85.
5. Belli, R. F., Lindsay, D. S., Gales, M. S. & McCarthy, T. T. (1994). Memory impairment and source misattribution in postevent misinformation experiments with short retention intervals. Memory and Cognition, 22, 40-54.
6. Belli, R. F., Windschitl, P. D., McCarthy, T. T. & Winfrey, S. E. (1992). Detecting memory impairment with a modified test procedure: Manipulating retention interval with centrally presented event items. Journal oj Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 356-367.
7. Burke, A., Heuer, F. & Reisberg, D. (1992). Remembering emotional events. Memory and Cognition, 20, 277-290.
8. Christianson, S. A. (1992). Emotional stress and eyewitness memory: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 284-309.
9. Christianson, S. A., Loftus, E. F., Hoffman, H. & Loftus, G. R. (1991). Eye fixations and memory for emotional events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 693-701.
10. Dodson, C. S. & Johnson, M. K. (1993). Rate of false source attributions depends on how questions are asked. American Journal of Psychology, 106, 541-557.
11. Dodson, C. & Reisberg, D. (1991). Indirect testing of eyewitness memory: The (non)effect of misinformation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 29, 333-336.
12. Glass, G. V., Peckham, P. D. & Sanders, J. R. (1972). Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analyses of variance and covariance. Revieu1 of Educational Research, 42, 237-288.
13. Heath, W. P. (1992). Effects of varying postevent information on memory for central and peripheral actions and props. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Texas at Arlington.
14. Heath, W. P., Grannemann, B. D., Sa\va, S. E. & Hodge, K. M. (1997). Effects of detail in eyewitness testimony on decisions by mock jurors. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 25, 51-71.
15. Johnson, M. K. & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85.
16. Lindsay, D. S. & Johnson, M. K. (1989). The eyewitness suggestibility effect and memory for source. Memory and Cognition, 17, 349-358.
17. Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560-572.
18. Loftus, E. F. (1979a). Reactions to blatantly contradictory information. Memory and Cognition, 7, 368-374.
19. Loftus, E. F. (1979/>). Eyeu-itness Testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Loftus, E. F. & Huffman, H. G. (1989). Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories. Journal of Experimental Psjchology: General, 118, 100-104.
21. Loftus, E. F., Loftus, G. R. & Messo, J. (1987). Some facts about 'weapon focus'. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 55-62.
22. Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G. & Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 19-31.
23. McCloskey, M. & Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1-16.
24. Maki, R. H. (1989). Recognition of added and deleted details in scripts. Memory and Cognition, 17, 274-282.
25. Payne, D. G., Toglia, M. P. & Anastasi, J. S. (1994). Recognition performance level and the magnitude of the misinformation effect in eyewitness memory. Psycbonomic Bulletin and Renew, 1, 376-382.
26. Pezdek, K. (1987). Memory for pictures: A life-span study of the role of visual detail. Child Development, 58, 807-815.
27. Pezdek, K. & Chen, H. C. (1982). Developmental differences in the role of detail in picture recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 33, 207-215.
28. Pezdek, K., Maki, R. H., Valencia-Laver, D., Whetstone, T., Stoeckert, J. & Dougherty, T. (1988). Picture memory: Recognizing added and deleted details. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 468-476.
29. Schacter, D. L. (1987). Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 501-518.
30. Schooler, J. W., Gerhard, D. & Loftus, E. F. (1986). Qualities of the unreal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 171-181.
31. Squire, L. R. (1992). Memory and the hippocampus: A synthesis of findings with rats, monkeys, and humans. Psychological Revieu; 99, 195-232.
32. Tulving, E. (1985). How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist, 40, 385-398.
33. Tversky, B. & Tuchin, M. (1989). A reconciliation of the evidence on eyewitness testimony: Comments on McCloskey and Zaragoza. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 86-91.
34. Wells, G. L. & Leippe, M. R. (1981). How do triers of fact infer the accuracy of eyewitness identifications? Using memory for peripheral detail can be misleading. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 682-687.
35. Wright, D. B. & Stroud, J. N. (1998). Memory quality and misinformation for peripheral and central objects. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 273-286.
36. Yuille.J. C. & Cutshall, J. L. (1986). A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 291-301.
37. Zaragoza, M. S. & Koshmider, J. W. III (1989). Misled participants may know more than their performance implies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 246-255.
38. Zaragoza, M. S. & Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the suggestibility of eyewitness memory. Journal oj Experimental Psychology: Leaning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 934-945.
39. Zaragoza, M. S. & McCloskey, M. (1989). Misleading postevent information and the memory impairment hypothesis: Comment on Belli and reply to Tversky and Tuchin. Joiinial of Experimental Psjchologf: General, 118, 92-99.
40. Zaragoza, M. S., McCloskey, M. & Jamis, M. (1987). Misleading postevent information and recall of the original event: Further evidence against the memory impairment hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 36-44.