La Rooy, D., Pipe, M.E., & Murray, J.E. (2004). Reminiscence and hypermnesia in children’s eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90, 67-74.

               
Reminiscence is “the elicitation of new information” across “repeated retrieval attempts.”  Hypermnesia is “increases in recall across several recall attempts.”  These phenomena have yet to be reliably tested on children, and there is some question as to whether repeated interviewing creates difficulty with suggestion.  Originally Erdelyi and Becker (1974) had participants study lists of words or pictures, and they found that recall was improved over repeated tests.  These results have been supported by subsequent research, including real world events like the O.J. Simpson trial.  This effect has been demonstrated in children by Ballard, Ammons, and Irion.  Dent and Stephenson found children remembered more details about a movie at a repeat interview the next day, but did not increase as more time passed.  This study seeks to examine reminiscence and hypermnesia in children’s eyewitness memory.

 

Experiment 1:  Forty children were introduced to a “friendly pirate” with whom they performed 20 event-activities.  Children were interviewed immediately afterward and again 24 hours later, half were told before the initial interview that they would be interviewed again later.  Transcripts were coded as correct for any actions or objects presented as well as errors labeled intrusions (item or event not present) or distortions (incorrect description. Results: To determine hypermnesia a mixed-model ANOVA determined that children had more corrects than errors, there was a change over the interviews in details reported, and a significant interaction.  Results showed that correct recall increased and errors remained constant across the two interviews.  Reminiscence was analyzed with a mixed-model ANOVA which found cumulative recall of details to be significant over the two interviews, more corrects than errors, and an interaction between the two.  The found that of the information reported at the interview 24 hours later, 92% was correct.  Interview instructions had no effect.

 

Experiment 2: Children from experiment 1 participated in three follow up interviews at 5 minute intervals six months after the original interview.  During the 5 minute intervals children were asked to draw pictures either unrelated to the event or about the friendly pirate with hopes of increasing the amount of hypermnesia on subsequent interviews. Results: Analyses for hypermnesia revealed that the only significant factor was that children still recalled more corrects than errors.  Meanwhile, examining reminiscence revealed that children still reported more corrects than errors, but also “cumulative recall of details differed as a function of interview,” and there was a significant interaction.  These results are inconsistent with previous findings of hypermnesia in adults.

 

Experiment 3: Experiment three sought to make all interviews the same (in experiment 1 the interviewer asked more questions and attempted to facilitate remembering, this was eliminated in experiment 2).  Children were interviewed once immediately after the event and then twice six months later with a 24 hour interval between.  Results:  Analysis showed that children still reported more corrects than errors, but that the number of details reported decreased over the 6 month interval.  Analyses for reminiscence found children still reported more corrects than errors, cumulative recall of details increased across the delay, but there was no significant interaction.  Analyses for hypermnesia over the interviews found only that children still reported more corrects than errors.  Analyses for reminiscence showed again that children reported more corrects than errors, there was an increase in cumulative recall, and a significant interaction. 

 

General Discussion: Reminiscence “proved to be reliable across all three experiments.”  However, hypermnesia could not be reliably reproduced.  Despite participants experiencing forgetting over the 6 month delay, new information was still provided at interview, although the number of details reported decreased over time.  This is consistent with current theory that children should be interviewed immediately and also it does not matter whether children are informed that there will be a second interview.  According to the trace integrity theory reminiscence and hypermnesia occur “due to retrieval relearning or as a result of reintegration of the memory trace.”  In other words, children forgetting the information over the six month delay made retrieval relearning impossible due to a loss of the originally encoded material.  While more real world events need to be tested, some studies have shown that repeated interviewing improves long term recall. 

 


Important Legal Disclaimer: The preceding are articles we read together in the Lampinen Lab Fall 2005 false memory reading group. By clicking on the button next to the article you can see the summary of that article. The summary was prepared by the student presenting that article and it is of course the case that the views expressed in the summary do not necessarily represent the views of the reading group as a whole, Dr. Lampinen, the Lampinen Lab, Hugo's, the University of Arkansas, the Razorback Football or Basketball teams (although we're not sure about cross country), people living down the street from us, Bob Dylan, Jack Fate, our extended families, or anyone else for that matter except for the student who wrote the summary (and they don't necessarily believe what they wrote either). 

U of A

Psych Dept

Grad Program

Lab Homepage

Reading Group

Lab Publications

Lab Presentations