Mood effects on eyewitness memory: Affective influences on susceptibility to misinformation

By Joseph P. Forgas, Simon M. Laham, Patrick Vargas. 2005

209 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d399a7ef49ea5dc8f8e7d0fcee3a9072574f356d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

How emotions inform judgment and regulate thought. (2007, background): “As predicted, individuals in happy moods do show high numbers of false memories ‐ a tendency that is significantly reduced in sad moods [44, 45 ] (Figure 3). As often occurs, happy and neutral participants perform similarly, because even neutral participants usually report positive resting moods.”
Can bad weather improve your memory? An unobtrusive field study of natural mood effects on real-life memory (2009, background): “However, as these mood induced processing effects appear largely subconscious and unintended, people may have little meta-cognitive awareness or indeed, control over mood effects on their thinking (Forgas et al., 2005; Nisbett & Wilson, 1977).”
Don’t Worry, Be Sad! On the Cognitive, Motivational, and Interpersonal Benefits of Negative Mood (2013, unknown): “Rather, people in a negative mood may be less prone to judgmental errors (Forgas, 1998), more resistant to eye-witness distortions (Forgas et al., 2005), more motivated (Goldenberg & Forgas, 2012), more sensitive to social norms (Forgas, 1999), and better at producing highquality and effective persu”
On being happy and gullible: Mood effects on skepticism and the detection of deception (2008, background): “The cognitive benefits of negative affect can be understood in terms of the more accommodative, externally oriented processing style it induces (Bless & Fiedler, 2006) that reduces some judgmental errors, improves eyewitness accuracy, and improves the efficacy of strategic communications such as per”
The turban effect: The influence of Muslim headgear and induced affect on aggressive responses in the shooter bias paradigm (2008, background): “Several experiments confirmed that positive affect promotes heuristic use and increases judgmental errors (Forgas, 1998), enhances reconstructive eyewitness errors ( Forgas, Vargas, & Laham, 2005 ), and reduces attention to concrete information (Forgas, 2007).”