Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Sep 29;15(1):33508.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-17377-4.

Examining the impact of warnings on eyewitness memory

McKinzey G Torrance  1 , Jessica M Karanian  2 , Elizabeth Race  3 , Ayanna K Thomas  3
Affiliations

Examining the impact of warnings on eyewitness memory

McKinzey G Torrance et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Prior research demonstrates that eyewitness memory is susceptible to misinformation. Specifically, memory for an original event can be contaminated by post-event information. Recently, we found that susceptibility to misinformation is reduced when mock eyewitnesses are given a warning about the threat of misinformation either before exposure to the post-event information (pre-warning) or after exposure to the post-event information (post-warning). In the present study, we investigated whether the timing of the warning (pre-warning vs. post-warning) and warning frequency (one warning vs. two warnings) impact memory accuracy as well as metacognitive assessments of memory accuracy. In Experiment 1, we found pre- and post-warning similarly decreased the negative impact of misinformation on memory and increased the metacognitive assessments memory. In Experiment 2, repeated warnings (two warnings) also decreased the negative impact of misinformation on memory and increased metacognitive assessments of memory related to misinformation. However, these benefits of repeated warning came at the cost of metacognitive assessments of memory for information that had not been contaminated by misleading post-event information. These results suggest that warnings can improve eyewitness memory accuracy and support the relationship between memory and confidence; however, over-warning an eyewitness may result in under-confidence in accurate memory.

Keywords: Eyewitness; Misinformation effect; Post-warning; Pre-warning; Repeated warnings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Accuracy results from the final memory test. “Proportion Correct” refers to the proportion of trials (consistent, neutral, misleading) that were answered correctly (i.e., the number of trials in which participants selected the correct details from the witnessed event divided by the total number of trials associated with each trial type). Error bars indicate standard error.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Misinformation selection results from the final memory test. Misinformation Selection refers to the proportion of trials (consistent, neutral, misleading) that were answered with misinformation from the post-event information (i.e., the number of trials in which participants selected the misinformation from the post-event information on the final memory test divided by the total number of trials associated with each trial type). Error bars indicate standard error.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Calibration Error across warning groups and trial types. Calibration error represents how accurate each participants’ relationship is between their accuracy and their confidence. The y-axis is calibration error which is on a scale from 0 to 1 with 0 representing no calibration error (perfect calibration), and a 1 representing high calibration error.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Accuracy results from the final memory test. “Proportion Correct” refers to the proportion of trials (consistent, neutral, misleading) that were answered correctly (i.e., the number of trials in which participants selected the correct details from the witnessed event divided by the total number of trials associated with each trial type). Error bars indicate standard error.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Misinformation selection results from the final memory test. Misinformation Selection refers to the proportion of trials (consistent, neutral, misleading) that were answered with misinformation from the post-event information (i.e., the number of trials in which participants selected the misinformation from the post-event information on the final memory test divided by the total number of trials associated with each trial type). Error bars indicate standard error.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Calibration Error across warning groups and trial types. Calibration error represents how accurate each participants’ relationship is between their accuracy and their confidence. The y-axis is calibration error which is on a scale from 0 to 1 with 0 representing no calibration error (perfect calibration), and a 1 representing high calibration error.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Loftus, E. F. & Elizabeth, F. in Loftus. In A History of Psychology In Autobiography. 199–227 (eds Lindzey, I. X. & Runyan, W. M.) (American Psychological Association, 2005). 10.1037/11571-006
    1. Chan, J. C. K., Thomas, A. K. & Bulevich, J. B. Recalling a witnessed event increases eyewitness suggestibility: the reversed testing effect. Psychol. Sci.20, 66–73 (2009). - PubMed
    1. Brewer, N. & Burke, A. Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law Hum. Behav.26, 353–364 (2002). - PubMed
    1. Nelson, T. O., Narens, L. & Metamemory A Theoretical Framework and New Findings. In Psychology of Learning and Motivationvol. 26125–173 (Elsevier, 1990).
    1. Thomas, A. K., Bulevich, J. B. & Chan, J. C. K. Testing promotes eyewitness accuracy with a warning: implications for retrieval enhanced suggestibility. J. Mem. Lang.63, 149–157 (2010).

LinkOut - more resources