关键词: 错误信息, 中期测试, 提取加强暗示感受性, 测试的保护作用

Abstract:

The misinformation effect is the idea that post-event misinformation changes individuals’ memory of the original event. In the classical misinformation paradigm, interim tests have two distinct effects on the misinformation effect: In some studies, participants who received an interim test were less likely to respond correctly on the final memory test and more likely to report misinformation, which is referred to as “retrieval enhanced suggestibility” (RES). In other studies, interim tests instead weakened the misinformation effect and improved participants’ memory performance, which is referred to as “Protective effect of testing” (PET). This paradox makes the effect of misinformation on primary memory more uncertain on the one hand, and calls into question the well-proven test effect in the field of learning on the other. Therefore, it is necessary to further clarify the effect of interim tests on the misinformation effect and its mechanism.
First, a systematic review of the theoretical explanations of RES and PET and their underlying mechanisms reveals that these two phenomena can be explained by the reconsolidation account, the attention capture hypothesis, and the retrieval fluency hypothesis (for RES), or by the memory strength theory, the retrieval effort theory, and the discrepancy detection theory (for PET). For RES, existing explanations include two main perspectives: On the one hand, an interim test may reduce the accessibility of the original memory, resulting in participants’ inability to report the original information correctly. On the other hand, an interim test may enhance participants’ learning of misinformation by promoting dissociation, increasing attention, and stimulating motivation, making individuals more likely to report misinformation. For the PET, when the original memory is sufficiently strong or when participants expend sufficient cognitive effort to retrieve the memory, the interim test can prompt participants to become aware of the differences between the information and thus reduce suggestibility. Further, the interim test is more conducive to weakening the misinformation effect when the same type of test is used as the final test. Second, the existing theories adopted different explanatory perspectives of “encoding” or “extraction” to explore the mechanisms of the interim test in different stages of the misinformation paradigm. Based on the differences in focus and the linkage of the underlying mechanisms, the existing theories are incorporated into a new, more macroscopic theoretical model that unifies the two different phenomena of RES and PET, and elucidates in more detail the mechanism of the effect of an interim test on the misinformation effect. Finally, the boundary conditions for the role of an interim test include the original information material, the type of interim test, and the characteristics of misinformation, which are potential influencing factors for the separation of RES and PET.
Future research should be conducted in the following two areas. First, the new theoretical model needs further empirical study to validate and improve it, so future research can directly validate each path in the model or further explore the interrelationships and relative contributions between different paths. Second, in order to broaden the scope of research, future research should further examine the effects of individual differences and social factors (e.g., need for cognition, information sources), and develop targeted interventions to reduce the negative impact of misinformation in everyday life.

Key words: misinformation, interim test, retrieval enhanced suggestibility, protective effect of testing