Evidence for the efficacy of the MORI technique: Viewers do not notice or implicitly remember details from the alternate movie version

Behavior Research Methods

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1224-1232

  Garry, Maryanne ^a   French, Lauren ^a   Gerrie, MAtthew P ^a   Mori, Kazuo ^b  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^b TOKYO UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RECALL; RECOGNITION; VISION;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MOTION PICTURES AS TOPIC; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 74949091979     PISSN: 1554351X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1224     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ABERSON, C. (2002). Interpreting null results: Improving presentation and conclusions with confidence intervals. Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis, 1, 36-42.
2. CUC, A., OZURU, Y., MANIER, D., & HIRST, W. (2006). On the formation of collective memories: The role of a dominant narrator. Memory & Cognition, 34, 752-762.
3. DODD, D. H., & BRADSHAW, J. M. (1980). Leading questions and memory: Pragmatic constraints. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 695-704. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90379-5
4. ECHTERHOFF, G., HIRST, W., & HUSSY, W. (2005). How eyewitnesses resist misinformation: Social postwarnings and the monitoring of memory characteristics. Memory & Cognition, 33,770-782.
5. FRENCH, L., GARRY, M., & MORI, K. (2008). You say tomato? Collaborative remembering between intimate couples leads to more false memories than collaborative remembering between strangers. Memory, 16, 262-273. doi:10.1080/09658210701801491
6. FRENCH, L., GARRY, M., & MORI, K. (2009). Social factors determine the influence of discussion on memory. Manuscript under review.
7. FRENCH, L., SUTHERLAND, R., & GARRY, M. (2006). Discussion affects memory for true and fake childhood events. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 671-680. doi:10.1002/acp.l219
8. GABBERT, F., MEMON, A., ALLAN, K., & WRIGHT, D. B. (2004). Say it to my face: Examining the effects of socially encountered misinformation. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 9, 215-227. doi:10.1348/1355325041719428 (Pubitemid 39208126)
9. GABBERT, F., MEMON, A., & WRIGHT, D. B. (2006). Memory conformity: Disentangling the steps toward influence during a discussion. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 480-485.
10. GABBERT, F., MEMON, A., & WRIGHT, D. B. (2007). I saw it for longer than you: The relationship between perceived encoding duration and memory conformity. Acta Psychologica, 124, 319-331. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.03.009
11. GARRY, M., FRENCH, L., KINZETT, T., & MORI, K. (2008). Eyewitness memory following discussion: Using the MORI technique with a Western sample. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 431-439. doi:10.1002/acp.l376
12. HIROKAWA, K., MATSUNO, E., MORI, K., & UKITA, J. (2006). Relationship between masculinity-femininity and concession in an experimental collaborative eyewitness testimony. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 132-139. doi:10.1111/j.l467-839X.2006.00190.x
13. IKIER, S., TEKCAN, A. I., GULGOZ, S., & KUNTAY, A. C. (2003). Whose life is it anyway? Adoption of each other's autobiographical memories by twins. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 237-247. doi:10.1002/ acp.869 (Pubitemid 39517249)
14. JOHNSON, M. K., HASHTROUDI, S., & LINDSAY, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.3
15. KANEMATSU, H., MORI, K., & MORI, H. (2003). Memory distortion in eyewitness pairs who observed nonconforming events and discussed them. Journal of Faculty of Education, Shinshu University, 109, 75-84.
16. KASSIN, S. M., & KIECHEL, K. L. (1996). The social psychology of false confessions: Compliance, internalization, and confabulation. Psychological Science, 7, 125-128. doi:10.1111/j.l467-9280.1996.tb00344.x
17. LANEY, C., KAASA, S. O., MORRIS, E. K., BERKOWTTZ, S. R., BERNSTEIN, D. M., & LOFTUS, E. F. (2008). The red herring technique: A methodological response to the problem of demand characteristics. Psychological Research, 72, 362-375. doi:10.1007/s00426-007-0122-6
18. LINDSAY, D. S. (2008). Source monitoring. In J. Byrne (Series Ed.) & H. L. Roediger III (VoL Ed.). Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference. Vol.2: Cognitive psychology of memory (pp. 325-348). Oxford: Elsevier.
19. LOFTUS, E. F. (1996). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. LOFTUS, E. F., LEVIDOW, B., & DUENSING, S. (1992). Who remembers best? Individual differences in memory for events that occurred in a science museum. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 93-107. doi: 10.1002/acp.2350060202
21. LOFTUS, G. R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 161-171. doi:10.111l/1467-8721.ep11512376
22. MEADE, M. L., & ROEDIGER, H. L., III (2002). Explorations in the social contagion of memory. Memory & Cognition, 30, 995-1009.
23. MITCHELL, K. J., & JOHNSON, M. K. (2000). Source monitoring: Attributing mental experiences. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 179-195). New York: Oxford University Press.
24. MORI, K. (2003). Surreptitiously projecting different movies to two subsets of viewers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 599-604.
25. MORI, K. (2007). A revised method for projecting two different movies to two groups of viewers without their noticing the duality. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 574-578.
26. ORNE, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment with particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776-783. doi:10.1037/h0043424
27. PATERSON, H. M., & KEMP, R. I. (2006). Comparing methods of encountering postevent information: The power of co-witness suggestion. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1083-1099. doi: 10.1002/acp.1261
28. ROEDIGER, H. L., III, MEADE, M. L., & BERGMAN, E. T. (2001). Social contagion of memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 365-371.
29. SCHNEIDER, D. M., & WATKINS, M. J. (1996). Response conformity in recognition testing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3,481-485.
30. SHAW, J.S., III, GARVEN, S., & WOOD, J. M. (1997). Co-witness information can have immediate effects on eyewitness memory reports. Law & Human Behavior, 21, 503-523. doi: 10.1023/A:l024875723399
31. SHEEN, M., KEMP, S., & RUBIN D. (2001). Twins dispute memory ownership: A new false memory phenomenon. Memory & Cognition, 29, 779-788.
32. TAKARANGI, M. K.T., PARKER, S. L, & GARRY, M. (2006). Modernising the misinformation effect: The development of a new stimulus set. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1-8. doi: l0.l002/acp.1209
33. THOMPSON, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31, 25-32. doi:10.3l02/0013189X031003025
34. TOUSIGNANT, J. P., HALL, D., & LOFTUS, E. F. (1986). Discrepancy detection and vulnerability to misleading postevent information. Memory & Cognition, 14, 329-338.
35. WRIGHT, D. B. (1993). Misinformation and warnings in eyewitness testimony.A new testing procedure to differentiate explanations. Memory, 2, 153-166. doi:10.1080/096582l9308258229
36. WRIGHT, D. B., MATHEWS, S. A., & SKAGERBERG, E. M. (2005). Social recognition memory: The effect of other people's responses for previously seen and unseen items. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 200-209. doi:l0.1037/1076-898X.1 1.3.200
37. WRIGHT, D. B., SELF, G., & JUSTICE, C. (2000). Memory conformity: Exploring misinformation effects when presented by another person. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 189-202. doi: l0.1348/000712600161781