Do lateral eye movements increase susceptibility to misinformation? A registered replication

The effects of eye movements on the content and characteristics of unpleasant autobiographical memories: an extended replication study

Experimental studies show that vividness and emotionality of aversive memories decrease after recall with eye movements. We aimed at replicating this finding. Relatedly, consistent with Conway's view that memory retrieval is constructive, we examined changes in the content of the memories. If eye movements render a memory less aversive, it may be avoided less, stimulating recall and increasing the opportunity to infer (contextual) details. Two experiments (N = 97 and N = 250) examined whether eye movements affect the number of central and peripheral memory details and characteristics. Female undergraduate students were randomly allocated to either eye movements with recall (EM) or recall only (RO). Before and after the experimental task, participants rated the vividness and emotionality, provided a detailed description and evaluated other memory characteristics. We replicated earlier findings that vividness (both experiments) and emotionality (experiment 2) were reduced more after EM compared to RO. However, conditions did not statistically significantly differ with respect to content details and other memory characteristics. Overall, findings support the idea that eye movements decrease the experience of the memory as vivid and emotional. Results are inconclusive regarding the idea that eye movements alter the number of recalled central and peripheral memory details.

Misinformation effects in an online sample: results of an experimental study with a five day retention interval

Traditional face-to-face laboratory studies have contributed greatly to our understanding of how misinformation effects develop. However, an area of emerging concern that has been relatively under-researched is the impact of misinformation following exposure to traumatic events that are viewed online. Here we describe a novel method for investigating misinformation effects in an online context. Participants (N = 99) completed the study online. They first watched a 10-min video of a fictional school shooting. Between 5 and 10 days later, they were randomly assigned to receive misinformation or no misinformation about the video before completing a recognition test. Misinformed participants were less accurate at discriminating between misinformation and true statements than control participants. This effect was most strongly supported by ROC analyses (Cohen's d = 0.59, BF10 = 8.34). Misinformation effects can be established in an online experiment using candid violent viral-style video stimuli.

The effectiveness of dual-task interventions for modulating emotional memories in the laboratory: A meta-analysis

Dual-tasks (e.g., making horizontal eye-movements) while recollecting a memory are often used both in the lab and the clinic (such as in EMDR therapy) to attenuate emotional memories and intrusive mental images. According to working memory theory, dual-task interventions are effective because they limit cognitive resources available for the processing of emotional memories. However, there is still ongoing debate about the extent to which and under what conditions dual-task interventions are effective to interfere with emotional memories. In this meta-analysis, we assessed k = 53 laboratory studies investigating the effects of dual-task interventions on negative and positive memories. The effects were measured with the raw mean reduction in vividness and emotionality self-report ratings of emotional memories before compared to after the intervention on 100-point rating scales. Results showed that the dual-task interventions made both negative and positive memories less vivid (mean reduction negative images = 9.18, 95% CI [7.06, 11.29]; mean reduction positive images = 11.73, 95% CI [8.59, 14.86]) and less emotional (mean reduction negative images = 6.22, 95% CI [4.50, 7.94]; mean reduction positive images = 6.71, 95% CI [2.21, 11.20]). Several moderators were tested and are discussed in the light of working memory theory.

Memory and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy: a potentially risky combination in the courtroom

Does Eye Movement and Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy affect the accuracy of memories? This recurrent issue in recent memory research bears relevance to expert witness work in the courtroom. In this review, we will argue that several crucial aspects of EMDR may be detrimental to memory. First, research has shown that eye movements undermine the quality and quantity of memory. Specifically, eye movements have been shown to decrease the vividness and emotionality of autobiographical experiences and amplify spontaneous false memory levels. Second, a sizeable proportion of EMDR practitioners endorse the controversial idea of repressed memories and discuss the topic of repressed memory in therapy. Third, in the Dutch EMDR protocol, patients are instructed to select the target image by using flawed metaphors of memory (e.g., memory works as a video). Such instructions may create demand characteristics to the effect that people over-interpret imagery during therapy as veridical memories. Collectively, the corpus of research suggests that several components of EMDR therapy (i.e., performing eye movements, therapist beliefs and therapeutic instructions) may undermine the accuracy of memory, which can be risky if patients, later on, serve as witnesses in legal proceedings.

The messy landscape of eye movements and false memories

Eye-Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy is a common treatment for PTSD. However, skeptics like James Ost question the theoretical underpinnings, highlight inconsistency of empirical findings surrounding the efficacy of such therapy, and warn against unknown drawbacks. Little is known about the impact of the eye movements, a critical component in EMDR, on susceptibility to false memories, and the existing literature is contradictory. We review the literature and present new findings to help tell the story of the effects of eye movements on memory. Taken as a whole, this small body of work suggests that eye movements do not reliably affect susceptibility to misinformation, nor do they appear to enhance memory, but they do seem to increase spontaneous false memories.

Side effects of induced lateral eye movements during aversive ideation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. It uses a dual-task approach, in which patients recall an aversive memory while making lateral eye movements. Research has shown that this 'eye movements' intervention reduces subjective memory vividness and emotionality. This study examined whether it also reduces memory accuracy on a visual discrimination task.

METHODS

Participants (68 undergraduates) underwent an aversive conditioning phase, in which two pictures of male faces were followed by shock. Then they recalled one face with (experimental condition) and one without (control condition) making lateral eye movements. Finally, they completed a stimulus discrimination test with slightly different faces shortly after the intervention and one day later.

RESULTS

Results showed that the eye movements intervention led to increased false-positive rates one day later.

LIMITATIONS

Our intervention targeted newly formed memory rather than consolidated memory.

CONCLUSIONS

The results inform theory about EMDR's mechanisms of change and suggest that the treatment may have side effects regarding memory accuracy.

Increases of correct memories and spontaneous false memories due to eye movements when memories are retrieved after a time delay

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. However, literature on possible adverse memory effects of EMDR is scarce. Using the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) false memory paradigm, we examined the susceptibility to spontaneous false memories after performing eye movements, as used in EMDR. In Experiment 1, 72 undergraduates received word lists containing negative and neutral associated words and immediately after this they were given a free recall and recognition test. In Experiment 2, 68 undergraduates underwent the free recall and recognition test 48 h later. During the free recall phase in both experiments, participants either performed eye movements or not (control condition). In Experiment 1, the two conditions did not differ statistically with regard to correct and false recall/recognition. In Experiment 2, correct memory rates were higher in the eye movement than in the control condition and this was accompanied by an increase in spontaneous false memories on both free recall and recognition. Although our experimental approach is far removed from clinical practice, our findings suggest that eye movements as used in EMDR might amplify both correct and false memory rates.