Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42809198›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2026

Misinformation resistance in memory reports of one instance of a repeated event: Post-warnings reduce misinformation endorsement in recognition.

Ewa Smołka, Eva Rubínová

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Ewa SmołkaApplied Memory Research Laboratory, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Ingardena 6 Street, 30-060, Kraków, Poland. ewa.smolka@uj.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5693-5268
Eva RubínováSchool of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, William Guild Building, Old Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB24 3FX, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9790-6180

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research shows that remembering repeated events differs from remembering single events, yet little research has examined suggestibility in adults' memory for repeated events. In the present experiment, we investigated the effects of eyewitness misinformation and the role of a warning against misinformation in a repeated-event scenario. We examined how different types of misinformation - entirely new items versus items present in non-target instances - influence reporting. Three hundred and nine participants watched four surveillance-mission videos that shared a general story structure but differed in key details. Participants were later exposed to pieces of misinformation in a video narrative of someone else reporting the first mission. Reporting was measured using free recall, cued recall, and recognition. We replicated the standard misinformation effect in the repeated-event context. We found that the warning reduced misinformation reporting, but the effect was present only in the recognition task. Based on the source-monitoring framework, we expected it would be easier to resist external (entirely new) misinformation than misinformation consistent with what was present in non-target instances, and this was also true. The warning's lack of efficacy may be accounted for in two ways. First, the inherent difficulty of attributing details to specific instances of repeated events may have overshadowed the potential effects of the warning. Second, ours was a general warning; it might not have been strong enough to restore an adequate understanding of a memory task distorted by misinformation.

Indexed as

Confidence and accuracy in memory reportsMisinformationPost-warningsRepeated eventsSource monitoring

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.