Do cognitive abilities reduce eyewitness susceptibility to the misinformation effect? A systematic review.

The fact that memories can be distorted by post-event misinformation has cast considerable doubt over the dependability of eyewitness evidence in legal contexts. However, despite its adverse practical implications, the misinformation effect is likely an unavoidable distortion stemming from the reconstructive nature of episodic memory. Certain cognitive abilities have been reported to offer protection against misinformation, suggesting that mechanisms aside from episodic memory may also be underpinning this type of memory distortion. The purpose of this review was to collate findings of associations between eyewitness misinformation susceptibility and individual differences in cognitive ability in adults aged 18 and over. Nine studies met the eligibility criteria for this review, including 23 distinct associations. Using a narrative synthesis, three categories of cognitive ability were identified as influencing susceptibility to misinformation: general intelligence and reasoning, perceptual abilities, and memory abilities. Across almost all categories, higher levels of ability were associated with reduced susceptibility to misinformation. While there is no indication that any one trait provides total immunity to the misinformation effect, there is a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest that several cognitive abilities create variance in individual levels of susceptibility. Future research should investigate not only if but how these cognitive abilities protect against misinformation distortions, for example, by contributing to more detailed encoding of the memory, enhancing discrepancy detection in the face of post-event misinformation, or improving source-monitoring during an eyewitness memory test.

The efficacy of interventions in reducing belief in conspiracy theories: A systematic review.

Conspiracy beliefs have become a topic of increasing interest among behavioural researchers. While holding conspiracy beliefs has been associated with several detrimental social, personal, and health consequences, little research has been dedicated to systematically reviewing the methods that could reduce conspiracy beliefs. We conducted a systematic review to identify and assess interventions that have sought to counter conspiracy beliefs. Out of 25 studies (total N = 7179), we found that while the majority of interventions were ineffective in terms of changing conspiracy beliefs, several interventions were particularly effective. Interventions that fostered an analytical mindset or taught critical thinking skills were found to be the most effective in terms of changing conspiracy beliefs. Our findings are important as we develop future research to combat conspiracy beliefs.

How does diagnostic labelling affect social responses to people with mental illness? A systematic review of experimental studies using vignette-based designs.

BACKGROUND: An outstanding question in the stigma literature is the extent to which negative responses are provoked by diagnostic labels, rather than observable symptoms of mental illness. Experimental studies frequently use vignettes to identify the unique effects of diagnostic labels on social responses to people with mental illness, independent of their behaviour or socio-demographic characteristics. AIMS: The current article identifies, evaluates, and synthesises the body of experimental vignette studies of labelling effects. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies were subjected to quality evaluation and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Of 1511 articles screened, 22 met inclusion criteria. Most studies focused on the diagnostic categories of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and autism spectrum disorder. The literature reported diverse effects, with diagnostic disclosure either exacerbating, mitigating, or not affecting stigma. The quality of studies was generally acceptable but the review identified an over-reliance on convenience sampling and unvalidated measures. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the complexity of labelling effects, which diverge across diagnostic categories and social contexts. The review emphasises the need for expansion of diagnostic labels and contexts studied, standardisation of validated attitude scales, incorporation of behavioural outcomes, and diversification of samples.