Revisión meta-analítica de los efectos de la sugestión en la memoria de niños y niñas Implicaciones para el testimonio
Resumen
Antecedentes/objetivo: La implantación de información engañosa en la memoria es un tópico de gran relevancia dadas las implicaciones que tiene para la evaluación de la memoria de los testigos. La sugestión ha sido el medio de implantación más estudiado. Por ello, se ha diseñado un estudio meta-analítico para estimar el tamaño del efecto de la sugestión en la implantación de información engañosa en el testimonio y las memorias, y los moderadores de tal efecto. Método: Se seleccionaron un total de 17 estudios diseñados para la evaluación de la implantación de memorias sugestionadas o la mera aceptación de información capciosa. Se ejecutaron meta-análisis de experimentos bare-bones. Resultados: Los resultados mostraron un tamaño del efecto promedio global (d = 1.68, IC 95% [1.47, 1.89]) significativo, positivo, generalizable entre los estudios y de una magnitud más que grande para la implantación de información engañosa debida a la sugestión. Convertido el efecto en probabilidades, la probabilidad estimada de implantación de cualquier información externa sugestionada fue del 31.3%. Asimismo, los resultados evidenciaron un tamaño del efecto promedio significativo, positivo, generalizable y más que grande para los moderadores grado de sugestión (d = 1.60, IC 95% [1.10, 2.10]), probabilidad de sugestión (d = 1.68, IC 95% [1.48, 1.88]), participación directa en el evento (d = 1.31, IC 95% [1.13, 1.49]), participación indirecta en el evento (d = 2.00, IC 95% [1.77, 2.23]), sugestión mediante el paradigma de diferencias individuales (d = 1.44, IC 95% [1.23, 1.65]) y sugestión mediante el paradigma de desinformación (d = 2.03, IC 95% [1.82, 2.24]). Conclusiones: Se discuten las implicaciones de los resultados para la evaluación de la fiabilidad del testimonio infantil.
Descargas
-
Resumen556
-
pdf 272
Citas
Ackil, J., & Zaragoza, M. (2011). Forced fabrication versus interviewer suggestions: Differences in false memory depend on how memory is assessed. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 933–942. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1785
Amado, B. G., Arce, R., & Fariña, F. (2015). Undeutsch hypothesis and Criteria Based Content Analysis: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 7(1), 3–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.11.002
Amado, B. G., Arce, R., Fariña, F., & Vilariño, M. (2016). Criteria-based content analysis (CBCA) reality criteria in adults: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 16(2), 201–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2016.01.002
American Psychological Association. (s. f.). Suggestibility. In APA dictionary of psychology. Retrieved February 25, 2025, from https://dictionary.apa.org/suggestibility
*Akehurst, L., Burden, N., & Buckle, J. (2009). Effect of socially encountered misinformation and delay on children’s eyewitness testimony. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16(1), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218710802620406
Alessi, H., & Ballard, M. (2001). Memory development in children: Implications for children as witnesses in situations of possible abuse. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79(4), 398–404. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.2001.tb01986.x
Arce, R., Fariña, F., Seijo, D., & Novo, M. (2015). Assessing impression management with the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Assessment, 22(6), 769–777. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191114558111
Arce, R., Selaya, A., Sanmarco, J., & Fariña, F. (2023). Implanting rich autobiographical false memories: Meta-analysis for forensic practice and judicial judgment making. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 23(3), 100386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2023.100386
Arias, E., Arce, R., Vázquez, M. J., & Marcos, V. (2020). Treatment efficacy on the cognitive competence of convicted intimate partner violence offenders. Anales de Psicología/Annals of Psychology, 36(3), 427-435. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.428771
Baker-Ward, L., Hess, T., & Flannagan, D. (1990). The effects of involvement on children’s memory for events. Cognitive Development, 5(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(90)90012-I
Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (1999). History of forensic psychology. In A. K. Hess & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), The handbook of forensic psychology (pp. 3–47). John Wiley and Sons.
Bates, J., Ricciardelli, L., & Clarke, V. (1999). The effects of participation and presentation media on the eyewitness memory of children. Australian Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 71–76. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1080/00049539908255338
*Brady, M. S., Poole, D. A., Warren, A. R., & Jones, H. R. (1999). Young children’s responses to yes-no questions: Patterns and problems. Applied Developmental Science, 3(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12006
Bruck, M., & Melnyk, L. (2004). Individual differences in children's suggestibility: A review and synthesis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 947–996. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1002/acp.1070
*Carter, C. A., Bottoms, B. L., & Levine, M. (1996). Linguistic and socioemotional influences on the accuracy of children’s reports. Law and Human Behavior, 20(3), 335–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499027
*Chan, L., & Okamoto, Y. (2006). Resisting suggestive questions: Can theory of mind help? Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20(3), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540609594559
Chrobak, Q. M., & Zaragoza, M. (2013). The misinformation effect: Past research and recent advances. In A. M. Ridley, F. Gabbert, & D. J. La Rooy (Eds.), Suggestibility in legal contexts: Psychological research and forensic implications (pp. 21–40). John Wiley & Sons.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). LEA.
Cunningham, J. (1988). Contributions to the history of psychology: XLVI. The pioneer work of Alfred Binet on children as eyewitness. Psychological Reports, 62(1), 271–277. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1988.62.1.271
*Davis, S. L., & Bottoms, B. L. (2002). Effects of social support on children’s eyewitness reports: A test of the underlying mechanism. Law and Human Behavior, 26(2), 185–215. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014692009941
Diges, M., Moreno, A., & Pérez-Malta, N. (2010). Efectos de sugestión en preescolares: Capacidades mentalistas y diferencias individuales en sugestionabilidad [Suggestion effects in preschoolers: Mentalist skills and individual differences in suggestibility]. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 33(2), 235–254. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1174/021037010791114634
Dijkstra, K., & Moerman, E. (2012). Effects of modality on memory for original and misleading information. Acta Psychologica, 140(1), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.003
Dilevski, N., Cullen, H. J., Marsh, A., Paterson, H. M., & van Golde, C. (2022). ‘Tell me what just happened’: The effect of immediate recall on adult memory for instances of a repeated event. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1–25. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1080/1068316X.2022.2117808
Dudek, I., & Polczyk, R. (2024). Memory distrust and suggestibility: A registered report. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 29(1), 100–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12249
Eisen, M., Gomes, D., Lorber, W., Perez, C., & Uchishiba, H. (2013). Using an individual differences approach to examine two distinct types of suggestibility of suggestibility effects. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(1), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2864
Eisen, M. L., & Lynn, S. J. (2001). Dissociation, memory and suggestibility in adults and children. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15(7), 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.834
Fariña, F., Arce, R., & Novo, M. (2002). Heurístico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchorage in judicial decision making]. Psicothema, 14(1), 39–46. http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/684.pdf
Fariña, F., Arce, R., & Real, S. (1993). Ruedas de identificación: De la simulación y la realidad [Lineups: A comparision of high fidelity research and research in a real context]. Psicothema, 6(3), 395–402. http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/935.pdf
Ferguson, C. (2009). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(5), 532–538. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015808
Gathercole, S. E. (1998). The development of memory. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 39(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021963097001753
Gobbo, C. (2000). Assessing the effects of misinformation on children's recall: How and when makes a difference. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(200003/04)14:2<163::AID-ACP630>3.0.CO;2-H
*Gobbo, C., Mega, C., & Pipe, M. E. (2002). Does the nature of the experience influence suggestibility? A study of children’s event memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81(4), 502–530. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2002.2662
*Goodman, G. S., Sharma, A., Thomas, S. F., & Golden, M. (1995). Mother knows best: Effects of relationship status and interviewer bias on children’s memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60(1), 195–228. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1995.1038
Goodman, G. S., Ogle, C. M., McWilliams, K., Narr, R. K., & Paz-Alonso, P. M. (2014). Memory development in the forensic context. In P. J. Bauer & R. Fivush (Eds.), The Wiley handbook on the development of children’s memory (pp. 920–941). Wiley Blackwell.
Gudjonsson, G. (1992). Interrogative suggestibility: Factor analysis of the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GSS-2). Personality and Individual Differences, 13(4), 479–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90077-3
Gudjonsson, G. (2013). Interrogative suggestibility and compliance. In A. M. Ridley, F. Gabbert, & D. J. La Rooy (Eds.), Suggestibility in legal contexts: Psychological research and forensic implications (pp. 45–58). John Wiley & Sons.
Gudjonsson, G., & Clark, N. (1986). Suggestibility in police interrogation: A social psychological model. Social Behavior, 1, 83–104. https://rb.gy/1lwwpd
Gudjonsson, G., Vagni, M., Maiorano, T., & Pajardi, D. (2016). Age and memory related changes in children’s immediate and delayed suggestibility using the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.029
Holliday, V., Reyna, V., & Hayes, B. (2022). Memory processes underlying misinformation effects in child witnesses. Developmental Review, 22(1), 37–77. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.2001.0534
Howe, M. L., Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (2006). Children’s basic memory processes, stress and maltreatment. Development and Psychopatology, 18(3), 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579406060378
*Jackson, S., & Crockenberg, S. (1998). A comparison of suggestibility in 4-year-old girls in response to parental or stranger misinformation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 19(4), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(99)80054-9
Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.3
Johnson, M. (1997). Source monitoring and memory distortion. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society, 362(1362), 1733–1745 https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1997.0156
Johnstone, K. L., Blades, M., & Martin, C. (2023). No gesture too small: An investigation into the ability of gestural information to mislead eyewitness accounts by 5- to 8-year-olds. Memory and Cognition, 51, 1287–1302. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.3758/s13421-023-01396-5
Klemfuss, J. Z., & Olaguez, A. P. (2018). Individual differences in children’s suggestibility: An updated review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 29(2), 158–182. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1080/10538712.2018.1508108
*Lindberg, M. A., Jones, S., McComas, L., & Thomas, S. W. (2001). Similarities and differences in eyewitness testimonies of children who directly versus vicariously experience stress. Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 162(3), 314–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221320109597486
Lee, K. (2004). Age, neuropsychological, and social cognitive measures as predictors of individual differences in susceptibility to the misinformation effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18(8), 997–1019. https://doi-org.ezbusc.usc.gal/10.1002/acp.1075
Li, C., Otgaar, H., Daele, T. V., Muris, P., Houben, S. T. L., & Bull, R. (2023). Investigating the memory reports of retractors regarding abuse. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 15(2), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2023a7
Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., & Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory, 4(1), 19–31.
Loftus, E. F., Schooler, J., & Wagenaar, W. (1985). The fate of memory: Comment on McCloskey and Zaragoza. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114(3), 375–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.114.3.375
*Ma, L., & Ganea, P. A. (2010). Dealing with conflicting information: Young children’s reliance on what they see versus what they are told. Developmental Science, 13(1), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00878.x
Maiorano, T., & Vagni, M. (2020). Coping strategies, immediate and delayed suggestibility among children and adolescents. Social Sciences, 9(11), 186. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9110186
Mastroberardino, S., & Marucci, F. (2013). Interrogative suggestibility: Was it just compliance or a genuine false memory? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18(2), 274–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02048.x
McCloskey, M., & Zaragoza, M. (1985). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.114.1.1
McDougall, W. (2001). An introduction to social psychology. Batoche Books. https://historyofeconomicthought.mcmaster.ca/mcdougall/socialpsych.pdf
*McDonald, K. P., & Ma, L. (2016). Preschoolers’ credulity toward misinformation from ingroup versus outgroup speakers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 148, 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.03.011
Merín, L., Mateo, A., Nieto, M., Ros, L., & Latorre, J. M. (2024). Language and autobiographical memory development from 5 to 12 years: A longitudinal perspective. Memory and Cognition. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01544-5
Montes, Á., Sanmarco, J., Cea, B., Marcos, V., & Seijo, D. (2024). Examining the persistence of central and peripherical information in honest witness. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 15(2), 96–104. https://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2024.02.079
Murachver, T., Pipe, M.-E., Gordon, R., Owens, J. L., & Fivush, R. (1996). Do, show, and tell: Children’s event memories acquired through direct experience, observation, and stories. Child Development, 67(6), 3029–3044. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131765
*Nida, R. E. (2018). Eyewitness memory in African American children from low-income families. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 64(4), 483–513. https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.64.4.0483
Nicolas, S., Collins, T., Gounden, Y., & Roediger H. (2011). The influence of suggestibility on memory. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(2), 399–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.019
Nurcombe, B. (1986). The child as witness: Competency and credibility. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 25(4), 473–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-7138(10)60004-0
Otgaar, H., Schell-Leugers, J., Howe, M., De la Fuente-Vilar, A., Houben, S., & Merckelbach, H. (2020). The link between suggestibility, compliance, and false confessions: A review using experimental and field studies. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35(2), 445–455. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3788
Ornstein, P. A., & Haden, C. A. (2001). Memory development or the development of memory? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 202–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00149
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., ... Alonso-Fernández, S. (2021). Declaración PRISMA 2020: Una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas [The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews]. Revista Española de Cardiología, 74(9), 790–799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
*Paz-Alonso, P. M., & Goodman, G. S. (2016). Developmental differences across middle childhood in memory and suggestibility for negative and positive events. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 34(1), 30–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2239
*Pezdek, K., & Roe, C. (1994). Memory for childhood events: How suggestible is it? Consciousness and Cognition, 3(3–4), 374–387. https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.1994.1021
*Pezdek, K., & Roe, C. (1997). The suggestibility of children’s memory for being touched: Planting, erasing and changing memories. Law and Human Behavior, 21(1), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024870127516
Polzcyk, R., Szpitalak, M., Kuczek, M., Maksymiuk, R., & Dudek, I. (2024). Interrogative suggestibility: The role of source monitoring, compliance, and memory in the context of minimally leading questions. Personality and Individual Differences, 222, 112583 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112583
*Ridley, A. M., Clifford, B. R., & Keogh, E. (2002). The effects of state anxiety on the suggestibility and accuracy of child eyewitnesses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16(5), 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.813
Ridley, A. (2013). Suggestibility: A history and introduction. In A. M. Ridley, F. Gabbert, & D. J. La Rooy (Eds.), Suggestibility in legal contexts: Psychological research and forensic implications (pp. 3–15). Wiley-Blackwell.
Rocha, E. M., Marche, T. A., & Briere, J. L. (2013). The effect of forced-choice questions on children's suggestibility: A comparison of multiple-choice and yes/no questions. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 45(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028507
Roebers, C. M., Gelhaar, T., & Schneider, W. (2004). ‘‘It’s magic!’’ The effects of presentation modality on children’s event memory, suggestibility, and confidence judgments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 87(4), 320–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2004.01.004
Rudy, L., & Goodman, G. (1991). Effects of participation on children’s reports: Implications for children’s testimony. Developmental Psychology, 27(4), 527–538. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.27.4.527
Sagie, A., & Koslowsky, M. (1993). Detecting moderators with meta-analysis: An evaluation and comparison of techniques. Personnel Psychology, 46(3), 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb00888.x
Sala, S., Baddeley, A., Peng, N., & Logie, R. (2024). Assessing long-term forgetting: A pragmatic approach. Cortex, 170, 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2023.11.009
Sanmarco, J., Selaya, A., Marcos, V., & Montes, Á. (2023). Contrasting the efficacy of the content analysis categories of the Global Evaluation System to discern between experienced memories and video observed memories. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 14(2), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2023.02.066
Saraiva, M., & Albuquerque, P. B. (2015). Influence of age, social desirability and memory in children's suggestibility. Psicologia, Reflexão e Crítica, 28(2), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7153.201528216
Schacter, D. L. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 54(3), 182–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.182
Schmidt, F. L., & Le, H. (2014). Software for the Hunter-Schmidt meta-analysis methods. Version 2.0. University of Iowa.
Schmidt, F., & Hunter, J. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (3th ed.). Sage.
Sullivan, G., & Feinn, R. (2012). Using effect size or why the p value is not enough. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 4(3), 279–282. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-12-00156.1
Tobey, A., & Goodman, G. (1992). Children’s eyewitness memory: Effects of participation and forensic context. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16(6), 779–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(92)90081-2
Volpini, L., Melis, M., Petralia, S., & Rosenberg, M. D. (2016). Measuring children’s suggestibility in forensic interviews. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 61(1), 104–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.12987
*Vrij, A., & Bush, N. (2000). Differences in suggestibility between 5–6 and 10–11-year-olds: The relationship with self-confidence. Psychology, Crime and Law, 6(2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160008410837
Zaragoza, M., Belli, R., & Payment, K. (2007). Misinformation effects and suggestibility of eyewitness memory. In M. Garry & H. Hayne (Eds.), Do justice and let the sky fall: Elizabeth F. Loftus and her contributions to science, law, and academic freedom (pp. 35–63). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203774861
Derechos de autor 2025 Los autores

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Sobre Derechos de autor y Licencias, más detalles aquí.


