Using an Individual Differences Approach to Examine Two Distinct Types of Suggestibility Effects

Summary: Two studies were conducted to examine relations between suggestibility effects studied in two commonly used research paradigms and a group of individual difference factors that have been theoretically linked to eyewitness suggestibility. In Study 1, we examined relations between the immediate acceptance of misinformation as measured by errors on misleading questions and individual differences in conformity, agreeableness, imagery ability, and memory. As predicted, the immediate acceptance of misinformation was associated with conformity but was not related to imagery ability. In Study 2, we examined relations between delayed retrieval errors produced during a classic misinformation paradigm and the same set of individual difference factors. Consistent with our predictions, delayed misinformation retrieval errors were related to imagery ability but were not related to conformity or agreeableness. Taken together, this predicted pattern of results across the two studies provides some preliminary evidence for an emerging distinction between these two types of suggestibility effects. Underlying theoretical, methodological, and practical issues related to the assessment of suggestibility effects are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Suggestibility is a fairly broad term that is frequently used in a vague and over-generalized manner to explain a wide array of diverse phenomenon. Failure to adequately distinguish between different types of suggestibility effects can do a great disservice to clinicians and other non-scientists who are trying to understand the literature and apply it in their practice. Foremost among these consumers are officers of the court, who increasingly rely on experts to explain these phenomena to triers of fact during legal proceedings. Because psychologists are frequently called upon to explain these constructs to lay people and legal professionals in the courtroom, it is highly important to develop a comprehensive understanding of the underlying processes involved in different types of suggestibility effects that can be well articulated and clearly distinguished. Schooler and Loftus (1993) proposed a useful distinction between two general types of suggestibility effects: immediate misinformation acceptance and delayed misinformation retrieval. Schooler and Loftus noted that immediate misinformation acceptance involves the immediate acceptance of inaccurate presuppositions in misleading questions. In contrast, delayed misinformation retrieval occurs when an individual incorporates the misinformation into subsequent memory reports. The predictions regarding individual differences associated with these two types of suggestibility effects lay the framework for an explanatory theory of suggestibility effects and memory distortion that can be applied to most suggestibility paradigms. As Underwood (1975) noted, any theoretical process will necessarily have a predicted tie with performance. Following this logic, a prediction concerning individual differences in performance should provide a critical test of any given aspect of a theory. The current studies employed an individual differences approach to test underlying differences between the production of delayed retrieval errors and the immediate acceptance of misinformation. To accomplish this task, we examined relations between suggestibility effects found in two commonly used research paradigms and individual difference factors that are theoretically related to eyewitness suggestibility. Before describing the current studies in detail, we will first briefly review the literature on individual differences in suggestibility.