Does Retrieval Enhance Suggestibility Because It Increases Perceived Credibility of the Postevent Information?

Guessing as a learning intervention: A meta-analytic review of the prequestion effect

Giving students test questions before they have learned the correct answers (i.e., prequestions) enhances learning. However, existing research has provided conflicting evidence on whether the benefits of prequestions are specific to the initially tested material or if they generalize to new, nontested material. In this review, we summarize the literature on the prequestion effect, describe the attention-based account underlying this effect, report a meta-analysis of the magnitude of the specific and general effects, and explore theoretically and empirically relevant moderator variables that influence the size and direction of the prequestion effect. This preregistered meta-analysis demonstrated a moderate specific effect (g = 0.54, k = 97) but a virtually nonexistent general effect (g = 0.04, k = 91). Overall, the attention-based account received support from some theoretically relevant moderator analyses. Future researchers are encouraged to conduct theoretically motivated studies to help clarify the mechanisms that underlie the attention-enhancing effects of prequestions and to explore the benefits of prequestions in educational domains to establish the extent to which these effects translate into the classroom.

Are witnesses able to avoid highly accessible misinformation? Examining the efficacy of different warnings for high and low accessibility postevent misinformation

The reliability of eyewitness memory continues to be an area of concern, particularly in situations that involve conflicting sources of information (e.g., the misinformation effect; Loftus et al., 1978, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4[1], 19-31). To mitigate the negative effects of misinformation, researchers have examined the efficacy of warnings that highlight the unreliability of postevent information. However, warnings have proven less effective for highly accessible misinformation (Eakin et al., 2003, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29[5], 813-825). In the present study, we examined the effects of different types of warnings for low accessibility misinformation in a standard single test misinformation paradigm, and highly accessible misinformation in a repeated testing misinformation paradigm (Chan et al., 2009, Psychological Science, 20[1], 66-73). We modeled these warnings after Eakin et al. (2003) to include both general warnings and specific question-by-question warnings. We found that warnings were effective in both types of misinformation paradigms. Additionally, memory accuracy in situations where participants were exposed to misleading information was improved when specific and general warnings were combined. We argue that both retrieval blocking of low accessibility items and enhanced contextual discrimination account for these findings.