Running head: FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

The Consequences of False Memories in Eyewitness Testimonies:

A Systematic Review
Megan L. Van Doren
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

Authors Note
Megan L. Van Doren, Department of Psychology, Bloomsburg University of
Pennsylvania.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Megan L. Van Doren,
Department of Psychology, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, PA 17815.
Email: mlv69435@huskies.bloomu.edu

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

The Consequences of False Memories in Eyewitness Testimonies:

A Systematic Review
For over a century, society has been debating on the capability of eyewitnesses in
providing accurate testimonies. The weight of these testimonies relies on the foundation of
memory. It is a topic that many enforcers of the law are uneducated about. If the criminal justice
system displays high confidence in the memory retention of witnesses and naivety towards its
scientific background, fundamental injustices become the consequences (Howe & Knott, 2015).
The human mind cannot possibly provide an impeccable portrayal of events due to many factors
that cause the active manipulation, integration, and reconstruction of memory (Straube, 2012).
These leading factors can either be internal (intrinsic) or environmental (extrinsic) and can
influence any phase of cognitive memory formation. These phases include translating stimuli
into brain storage (encoding), converting information from short-term to long-term memory
(consolidation), and reassessing past information (retrieval). When the workings of memory
become decayed, inaccessible, or altered, false memories can arise. A false memory is the
recalling of an event that never transpired. Many famous historical cases involving therapy
malpractices, rape, and murder have been unjustly prosecuted due to the impact of false
memories. A rapid increase of research and awareness arose in the 1990s because of this social
dilemma (Laney & Loftus, 2013). Since then, scientists have discovered the neuropsychological,
developmental, and social features that contribute to false memories. With prior knowledge of
these dynamics, a few scientists even found solutions that may diminish the occurrence of false
memories. If law enforcement officials seek to understand the aspects of false memory and its
consequences during eyewitness testimonies then the integrity of the justice system may
someday be upheld.

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

In order to understand how false memories occur and its harm towards eyewitness
testimonies, one must understand the neuropsychology behind the phenomena. Data from
neuroimaging studies suggest that false memories can occur in the occipital and parietal regions
of the brain during encoding, in the medial temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex during
consolidation, and in the hippocampus during retrieval (Straube, 2012). Stress, a universal
experience, is known to negatively affect the hippocampus region of the brain due to the
overproduction of the stress hormone called cortisol. The timing between a stressful encounter
and the moment cortisol levels peak is crucial in order to understand memory distortion.
Previous studies have provided evidence that cortisol levels peak around 20-30 min after stress
and that false memories can occur during this time. However, Schwabe and Wolf (2014) wanted
to determine if false memories could occur during later intervals after stress. They hypothesized
that retrieval impairment would not occur immediately after stress, some retrieval impairment
would occur 25 min after stress (during peak cortisol levels), and most retrieval impairment
would occur 90 min after stress despite baseline cortisol levels. To test this hypothesis, 120
nonsmoking college students (60 women, 60 men, Mean ( SEM) = 23.5 years) with no life-time
history of physiological or neurological disorders participated in the study. A 2 (stress or control
condition) x 3 (0, 25, or 90 min) between-subjects design was used. Ten men and 10 women
were randomly assigned to one of the six groups and then learned a list of words. A day later,
participants were exposed to either a cold pressor test (stressor) or a warm water control
manipulation and then completed a recognition test either immediately after the stress, 25 min
later, or 90 min later. They were measured in memory performance, stress response, and cortisol
levels. As predicted, retrieval impairment did not occur immediately after the stressful encounter,
and a higher occurrence of retrieval impairment was exhibited 90 min later than 25 min later.

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

These results indicated that the stress effects and the production of false memories were time
dependent (Schwabe & Wolf, 2014). This study is important to the understanding of false
memories during eyewitness testimonies because the longer it takes a witness to report a crime,
the more susceptible they could be to false memories. However, it must be noted that participants
were limited to nonsmokers without a life-time history of physiological or neurological disorders
and that sample may not represent the general population of college students.
In multiple studies, scientists have discovered an association between the physiological
effects of stress and an individual's emotional response to a demanding situation. When
experiencing emotionally strong stimuli, some studies have found that older and younger adults
have similar accuracy for source memory (Aizpurua, Garcia-Bajos, & Migueles, 2011). Source
memory is the ability to trace a memory back to its origin. Conversely, other studies have found
that source memory ability is affected by normal aging to the prefrontal cortex and medial
temporal lobes during consolidation. Aizpurua et al. (2011) wanted to test these controversial
findings in order to determine if older adults were more vulnerable than younger adults to false
memories during a real-life stressor. The scientists hypothesized that older adults would show
poorer performance in source memory capacity than younger adults. Thirty older adults (age
range: 56-75 years) and 37 younger adults (age range: 18-33 years) participated in the study.
Participants watched a video of a convenience store being robbed. After viewing the video, they
were asked to fill in a sheet with their personal details, rated level of emotion and violence
experienced, and the videos impact on the viewer. After each character was described,
participants were then asked to indicate who they believed was the perpetrator of the robbery.
The data revealed that older adults had a lower proportion of correct attributions than younger
adults. Thus, the results produced strong evidence that older adults have a lower capacity for

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

source attribution due to aging deficits (Aizpurua et al., 2011). This study can be related towards
eyewitness testimonies regarding felony offences. Age is a factor that must be considered in
order to reduce the occurrence of false memories and have the right offender convicted.
However, it should be noted that there were no tests to determine if the capacity for source
attribution, between older adults, diminishes slightly or rapidly with age. Thus, future research is
necessary for additional understanding.
Similarly to Aizpurua et al. (2011), other researchers studied the effects of ageing within
older adults and their vulnerability to false memories. Correspondingly, Meade, Geraci, and
Roediger III (2012) agreed that normal aging to the prefrontal cortex has a negative correlation
to memory capacity. Conversely, other data suggested that older adults do not share the same
measure of frontal lobe decay. Thus, they are not equally subjected to false memories. Therefore,
Meade et al. (2012) proposed that older adults could be categorized as having high- or lowfrontal functioning and when using forced report cued recall, low-frontal older adults would have
the most errors in memory. In forced report cued recall, participants do not determine their own
means for reporting an item and instead must comply with an interviewer to produce a particular
number of responses. It was made known that even guessing was accepted. Sixty-four older
adults participated in a sorting test and a word association test while being measured for
accuracy and frontal lobe functioning. Once they were categorized as either having high- or lowfrontal functioning, they participated in the main study along with 32 undergraduates. The
experiment consisted of a 3 (young adults, high-frontal older adults, or low-frontal older adults)
2 (free report cued recall or forced report cued recall) between-subjects design. The levels of
false memory were measured during both recall tests and a final source monitoring test. The data
from the free report cued recall test suggested that low-frontal older adults demonstrated higher

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

levels of false memories than the other groups. Interestingly, the scores between the younger
adults and the high-frontal older adults were similar. However, after forced report cued recall,
the results contrasted with the experimenters hypothesis. High- and low-frontal older adults
displayed similar levels of false memories, but both had lower memory scores than younger
adults. On the other hand, in the final recognition test, high-frontal older adults displayed greater
levels of source attribution capacity than low-frontal older adults (Meade et al., 2012). Age and
neuropsychological status are equally important for understanding a persons vulnerability to
false memories. This study was the first to compare the impact of frontal functioning and forced
report cued recall tests on susceptibly to false memories. In eyewitness testimonies, the influence
of the interviewer plays a large role. If the influence is high, false memories can occur in older
adults despite differentiating lobe functioning. However, when influence is low, low-frontal
older adults are likewise susceptible to false memories. A potential problem discovered in the
current study was that a prior study was conducted using the same older adult participants. The
current study required a different sample of younger adults due to a change in the students
semesters. Thus, the prior experience that the older adult participants had could have influenced
the results. These changes in performance are called practice effects, and they can disrupt the
validity of an experiment.
Besides the interviewer having a crucial role in eyewitness testimonies, the impact of cowitnesses should not be taken lightly. In life, the majority of crimes that occur are witnessed by
more than one person. Since human beings are social creatures, witnesses tend to rely on other
witnesses in order to make important decisions during the identification and trial process.
However, this dependency can produce false memories and may lead to wrongful convictions. In
an attempt to expose this issue, Levett (2013) examined the influence of a confederate co-witness

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

on identification decisions during a police lineup. She hypothesized that participants would be
highly influenced by the co-witness if the confederate expressed high confidence and chose from
the police lineup compared to control and lower level condition groups (those rejecting the
lineup). Also, she predicted that the influence of co-witnesses on decision making would be
higher in a lineup with the offender present than in a target absent lineup. The participants
included 304 undergraduate students (mostly female and 60% Caucasian), and the experiment
was a 2 (lineup choice or lineup rejection) 2 (high or low confidence of co-witness) 2 (target
present or target absent) between-subjects design. Initially, the participants viewed a video of a
man who stole a printer. Afterwards, they attempted to identify the man in a police lineup after
hearing the choice and confidence of the co-witness. The participants decisions and confidence
ratings were then measured. Even though Levetts (2013) results exhibited that witnesses
decisions were altered based on co-witness information, her hypothesis was refuted. Instead of
the co-witnesss confidence level impacting decision making, it only affected how confident
witnesses felt about their own lineup decisions. Also, target presence had no main effect on
decision making. In the criminal justice system, mistaken eyewitness identification is one of the
main reasons for wrongful conviction, and this study helped expose witnesses vulnerabilities to
false memories during a police lineup. In this study, however, only female confederates were
used. Thus, the sample did not fully depict the general population of co-witnesses.
As a result of rapid eyewitness misidentifications and false allegations of sexual abuse
during the 1990s, the phenomenon of False Memory Syndrome was coined (Freyd, 1992). Since
then, the expansion of false memory research has made significant progress. By attempting to
understand the neuropsychological, developmental, and social features behind false memories,
Lyle and Jacobs (2010) created a study that showed potential to diminish the chance of false

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

memories from occurring during eyewitness testimonies. Past research supported the use of
bilateral eye movements (saccades) before an interview and its enhancement in memory
retrieval. The theory behind this potential solution was either due to the activation of both
cerebral hemispheres (left and right), or the activation of the occipital and parietal regions that
are involved in encoding. In the study, 99 undergraduates (all females, 54 right-handed, 35 lefthanded, age range: 18-30 years) were first categorized by handedness. Subsequently, the
participants viewed two slideshows depicting crimes. Afterwards, they were asked to read
descriptions of the events written by previous participants that contained three contradictory
details. Next, the participants performed either the saccade-induced retrieval enhancement task
(moving the eyes horizontally in synchrony) or a central fixation task (keeping the eyes focused
on one object). Finally, they were tested for memory capacity and confidence. Overall, Lyle and
Jacobs (2010) found strong evidence of saccades improving levels of retention regardless of a
participants handedness and that participants showed decreased confidence when affected by
false memories. However, left-handed people were found to have a more superior memory than
right-handed people, and previous studies corresponded to this finding. The results supported the
experimenters aspiration to classify saccade-induced retrieval enhancement as a potential
solution in order to help improve eyewitness evidence. Nonetheless, there was an absence of men
participants, so the study did not represent the general population. Furthermore, the influence
method of co-witnesses during the study was very static (written descriptions), and therefore did
not provide an actual depiction of a real-world situation.
A report published by the Innocence Project stated that over 75% of the wrongful
convictions towards exonerated prisoners were because of eye-witness misidentification (Howe
& Knott, 2015). Hence, it is essential for forensic fields in the criminal justice system to integrate

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

research on memory retention. The previous studies indicated that vulnerability to false
memories during eyewitness testimonies may be dependent on the timing of stress, age, frontal
lobe functioning, and influence of co-witnesses. For future studies, the integration of participants
from different demographics may provide intriguing results regarding memory capacity due to
ethnic differences regarding human personality theories (introversion vs. extraversion).
However, the continuation of false memory awareness provides hope for the future of the
criminal justice system.

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

10

References
Aizpurua, A., Garcia-Bajos, E., & Migueles, M. (2011). False recognition and source attribution
for actions of an emotional event in older and younger adults. Experimental Aging
Research, 37, 310-329. doi:10.1080/0361073X.2011.568829
Freyd, P. (1992). Memory and reality. Retrieved from http://www.fmsfonline.org
Howe, M. L., & Knott, L. M. (2015). The fallibility of memory in judicial processes: Lessons
from the past and their modern consequences Memory, 23, 633656.
doi:10.1080/09658211.2015.1010709
Laney, C. F. (2013). Recent advances in false memory research. South African Journal of
Psychology, 43, 137-138.
Levett, L. M. (2013). Co-witness information influences whether a witness is likely to choose
from a lineup. Legal & Criminological Psychology, 18, 168-180.
Lyle, K. B., & Jacobs, N. E. (2010). Is saccade-induced retrieval enhancement a potential means
of improving eyewitness evidence?. Memory, 18, 581-594.
doi:10.1080/09658211.2010.493891
Meade, M. L., Geraci, L. D., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2012). Neuropsychological status in older
adults influences susceptibility to false memories. The American Journal of Psychology,
4, 449-466. doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.125.4.0449
Schwabe, L., & Wolf, O. T. (2014). Timing matters: Temporal dynamics of stress effects on
memory retrieval. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14, 1041-1048.
doi:10.3758/s13415-014-0256-0

FALSE MEMORIES AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES

11

Straube, B. (2012). An overview of the neuro-cognitive processes involved in the encoding,

consolidation, and retrieval of true and false memories. Behavioral & Brain Functions,
8, 35-44. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-8-35