Syftet med denna studie var att undersöka hur studenters minnesprestation påverkas av missvisande information, om polisstudenters minnesprestation skiljer sig signifikant från psykologstudenters samt om säkerheten är högre på de betydande objekten, det vill säga de frågor som blivit manipulerade med missvisande information, än övriga frågor. Ett experiment genomfördes där urvalet bestod av polisstudenter (n = 45) och psykologstudenter (n = 19) på Umeå universitet. Samtliga 64 deltagare, med en medelålder på 24.4 år, fick se en video där ett fiktivt brott begicks för att sedan läsa ett narrativ av videon, som antingen innehöll missvisande eller korrekt information, och slutligen fylla i en enkät med flervalsfrågor relaterat till videon. En variansanalys (ANOVA) användes för att analysera deltagarnas svar som visade på att det förelåg en missinformationseffekt, det vill säga att deltagarna som fått missvisande information blev påverkade av det, samt att deltagarna som blivit tilldelade det missvisande narrativet rapporterade lägre säkerhet i sina svar än de som blivit tilldelade det korrekta narrativet, båda dessa oberoende av deltagarnas utbildning. Slutsatsen som kan dras utifrån detta är att minnesprestation och säkerhet påverkas av missvisande information, däremot verkar utbildning inte vara en prediktor för detta. Framtida forskning bör genomföra liknande studier med större urval då detta ansågs vara en brist i denna studie. / The purpose of this study was to investigate how students' memory performance is affected by misleading information, if police students' memory performance differs significantly from psychology students and if confidence is higher on the critical items, meaning the questions which have been manipulated with misinformation, than other questions. An experiment was conducted where the sample consisted of police students (n = 45) and psychology students (n = 19) at Umeå University. All 64 participants, with a mean age of 24.4 years, watched a video of a fictional crime, then read a narrative of the video, which contained either misleading or accurate information, and finally completed a multiple-choice survey related to the video. Ananalysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze participants' responses which showed that there was a misinformation effect, meaning that the participants who received misleading information were affected by it, and that participants assigned to the misleading narrative reported lower confidence in their responses than those assigned to the correct narrative, both of these independent of the participants' education. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that memory performance and confidence are affected by misleading information, however, education does not seem to be a predictor of this. Future research should conduct similar studies with a bigger sample as this was considered a shortcoming in this study.

The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of false memories and Need for Cognition (NFC). The relationship was examined using a typical misinformation paradigm where participants viewed a video clip which depicted a museum burglary and were later presented with an auditory narrative that contained misleading information about the video they previously saw. Half of the participants were exposed to warnings of misinformation. Additionally, the effect of question type (e.g., central, peripheral, and neutral) was taken into account. A main effect for NFC was found indicating that high NFC individuals had fewer false memories for the originally witnessed event than low NFC individuals. It was also found that memory for central details was better than for peripheral details. Furthermore, an interaction between warning and question type showed that when a warning was present, memory for the misleading peripheral details was stronger. Overall, the results demonstrate that there is a difference between high and low NFC individuals and the way memory is processed in the misinformation paradigm. Additionally, the results of this study reaffirm the notion that post-event information can hinder an eyewitness’s memory for an original event.