Cited by 560Memory Processes and InfluencesMisinformation and Its ImpactsDeception detection and forensic psychology

Sources of the continued influence effect: when misinformation in memory affects later inferences

Johnson, Hollyn M., Seifert, Colleen M.·1994·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

Abstract

Several lines of research have found that information previously encoded into memory can influence inferences and judgments, even when more recent information discredits it. Previous theories have attributed this to difficulties in editing memory—failing to successfully trace out and alter inferences or explanations generated before a correction. However, in Experiments 1A and IB, Ss who had received an immediate correction made as many inferences based on misinformation as Ss who had received the correction later in the account (and presumably had made more inferences requiring editing.) In a 2nd experiment, the availability (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973) of the misinformation within the comprehension context was tested. The results showed that Ss continued to make inferences involving discredited information when it afforded causal structure, but not when only incidentally mentioned or primed during an intervening task. Experiments 3A and 3B found that providing a plausible causal alternative, rather than simply negating misinformation, mitigated the effect. The findings suggest that misinformation can still influence inferences one generates after a correction has occurred; however, providing an alternative that replaces the causal structure it affords can reduce the effects of misinformation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0278-7393.20.6.1420

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are many cases where two cognitive states with opposite content do not lead to any negative affect.

    “More generally, there are many cases where two cognitive states with opposite content do not lead to any negative affect—a topic widely discussed both in philosophy and in psychology.”

    From Conative Dissonance (2026) · cites this paper as Johnson and Seifert 1994

  • Continued reliance on discredited information is very difficult to correct.

    “Classical laboratory research on memory for inferences [10, 6] demonstrates that the continued reliance on discredited information is very difficult to correct.”
  • People can still be influenced by retracted misinformation even when they clearly remember and understand a subsequent correction.

    “Even when people clearly remember and understand a subsequent correction when asked about it immediately (suggesting that they have encoded it and can retrieve and potentially comply with it), they can still be influenced by the effect of the retracted misinformation.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Published
1994-11
Volume
20
Issue
6
Pages
1420-1436
ISSN
  • 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1285
OpenAlex
W2012975501
Cited by
560
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 11
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
Keywords
continued influence effect, misinformation, memory editing, causal structure, availability heuristic, priming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review