Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32868423›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020

Protecting memory from misinformation: Warnings modulate cortical reinstatement during memory retrieval.

Jessica M Karanian, Nathaniel Rabb, Alia N Wulff, McKinzey G Torrance, Ayanna K Thomas, Elizabeth Race

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Warning people about the risk of AI error mitigates human acquisition of AI bias.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Warning before misinformation exposure modulates memory encoding.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jessica M KaranianDepartment of Psychology, Fairfield University, Fairfield, CT 06824; jessica.karanian@fairfield.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4662-2924
Nathaniel RabbDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.ORCID 0000-0002-7283-2549
Alia N WulffDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.ORCID 0000-0001-7271-1539
McKinzey G TorranceDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.ORCID 0000-0002-3288-6673
Ayanna K ThomasDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.ORCID 0000-0001-8173-5911
Elizabeth RaceDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.ORCID 0000-0002-4133-5734

Funding

Upgrade to 3 Tesla MRI scanner for brain imaging at MITS10OD021569 · OD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI GABRIELI, JOHN · 2016 to 2016
$600k
NIH HHS S10 OD021569
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exposure to even subtle forms of misleading information can significantly alter memory for past events. Memory distortion due to misinformation has been linked to faulty reconstructive processes during memory retrieval and the reactivation of brain regions involved in the initial encoding of misleading details (cortical reinstatement). The current study investigated whether warning participants about the threat of misinformation can modulate cortical reinstatement during memory retrieval and reduce misinformation errors. Participants watched a silent video depicting a crime (original event) and were given an initial test of memory for the crime details. Then, participants listened to an auditory narrative describing the crime in which some original details were altered (misinformation). Importantly, participants who received a warning about the reliability of the auditory narrative either before or after exposure to misinformation demonstrated less susceptibility to misinformation on a final test of memory compared to unwarned participants. Warned and unwarned participants also demonstrated striking differences in neural activity during the final memory test. Compared to participants who did not receive a warning, participants who received a warning (regardless of its timing) demonstrated increased activity in visual regions associated with the original source of information as well as decreased activity in auditory regions associated with the misleading source of information. Stronger visual reactivation was associated with reduced susceptibility to misinformation, whereas stronger auditory reactivation was associated with increased susceptibility to misinformation. Together, these results suggest that a simple warning can modulate reconstructive processes during memory retrieval and reduce memory errors due to misinformation.

Indexed as

AdultCommunicationFemaleHumansMaleMemoryMental RecallNarrationReproducibility of ResultsRetention, PsychologyTime FactorsYoung Adultcortical reinstatementeyewitness memoryfMRImisinformation

Identifiers

PMID32868423
PMCPMC7502729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.