Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33237488›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2021

The effects of stress on eyewitness memory: A survey of memory experts and laypeople.

Carey Marr, Henry Otgaar, Melanie Sauerland, Conny W E M Quaedflieg, Lorraine Hope

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Contemporaneous notes and juror decision-making: Do reminiscence and expert testimony play a role?Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026
    Article
  2. New Insights on Expert Opinion About Eyewitness Memory Research.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Carey MarrFaculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 6229 ER. carey.marr@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0665-1811
Henry OtgaarFaculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 6229 ER.
Melanie SauerlandFaculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 6229 ER.
Conny W E M QuaedfliegFaculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 6229 ER.
Lorraine HopeDepartment of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
Maastricht University · NLUniversity of Portsmouth · GB

Funding

Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Programme The House of Legal Psychology (EMJD-LP) FPA 2013-0036, SGA 532473-EM-5-2017-1-NL-ERA MUNDU
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This survey examined lay and expert beliefs about statements concerning stress effects on (eyewitness) memory. Thirty-seven eyewitness memory experts, 36 fundamental memory experts, and 109 laypeople endorsed, opposed, or selected don't know responses for a range of statements relating to the effects of stress at encoding and retrieval. We examined proportions in each group and differences between groups (eyewitness memory experts vs. fundamental memory experts; experts vs. laypeople) for endorsements (agree vs. disagree) and selections (don't know vs. agree/disagree). High proportions of experts from both research fields agreed that very high levels of stress impair the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. A majority of fundamental experts, but not eyewitness experts, endorsed the idea that stress experienced during encoding can enhance memory. Responses to statements regarding moderating factors such as stressor severity and detail type provided further insight into this discrepancy. Eyewitness memory experts more frequently selected the don't know option for neuroscientific statements regarding stress effects on memory than fundamental memory experts, although don't know selections were substantial among both expert groups. Laypeople's responses to eight of the statements differed statistically from expert answers on topics such as memory in children, in professionals such as police officers, for faces and short crimes, and the existence of repression, providing insight into possible 'commonsense' beliefs on stress effects on memory. Our findings capture the current state of knowledge about stress effects on memory as reflected by sample of experts and laypeople, and highlight areas where further research and consensus would be valuable.

Indexed as

CrimeMemoryAdultAustraliaCanadaChildFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesCommonsense beliefExpertLaypeopleMemoryStress

Identifiers

PMID33237488
PMCPMC8024237
OpenAlexW3107059500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.