Literature DB >> 18248126

How communication goals determine when audience tuning biases memory.

Gerald Echterhoff1, E Tory Higgins, René Kopietz, Stephan Groll.   

Abstract

After tuning their message to suit their audience's attitude, communicators' own memories for the original information (e.g., a target person's behaviors) often reflect the biased view expressed in their message--producing an audience-congruent memory bias. Exploring the motivational circumstances of message production, the authors investigated whether this bias depends on the goals driving audience tuning. In 4 experiments, the memory bias was found to a greater extent when audience tuning served the creation of a shared reality than when it served alternative, nonshared reality goals (being polite toward a stigmatized-group audience; obtaining incentives; being entertaining; complying with a blatant demand). In addition, the authors found that these effects were mediated by the epistemic trust in the audience-congruent view but not by the rehearsal or accurate retrieval of the original input information, the ability to discriminate between the original and the message information, or a contrast away from extremely tuned messages. The central role of epistemic trust, a measure of the communicators' experience of shared reality, was supported in meta-analyses across the experiments. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18248126     DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.137.1.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  10 in total

1.  Interpersonal memory-based guidance of attention is reduced for ingroup members.

Authors:  Xun He; Anne G Lever; Glyn W Humphreys
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  How retellings shape younger and older adults' memories.

Authors:  Sarah J Barber; Mara Mather
Journal:  J Cogn Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2014-04

3.  When two is too many: Collaborative encoding impairs memory.

Authors:  Sarah J Barber; Suparna Rajaram; Arthur Aron
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-04

4.  Experiencing cigarette craving with a friend: A shared reality analysis.

Authors:  John D Dimoff; Michael A Sayette; John M Levine
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2019-10-17

5.  Why do we remember? The communicative function of episodic memory.

Authors:  Johannes Mahr; Gergely Csibra
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 12.579

6.  Hand over Heart Primes Moral Judgments and Behavior.

Authors:  Michal Parzuchowski; Bogdan Wojciszke
Journal:  J Nonverbal Behav       Date:  2014

Review 7.  The contribution of activity theory to modeling multi-actor decision-making: A focus on human capital investments.

Authors:  Silvia Marocco; Alessandra Talamo
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-09-27

8.  When Do We Confuse Self and Other in Action Memory? Reduced False Memories of Self-Performance after Observing Actions by an Out-Group vs. In-Group Actor.

Authors:  Isabel Lindner; Cécile Schain; René Kopietz; Gerald Echterhoff
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-11-02

9.  Explicit mentalizing mechanisms and their adaptive role in memory conformity.

Authors:  Rebecca Wheeler; Kevin Allan; Dimitris Tsivilis; Douglas Martin; Fiona Gabbert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A Tool for Assessing the Experience of Shared Reality: Validation of the German SR-T.

Authors:  Bjarne Schmalbach; Linda Hennemuth; Gerald Echterhoff
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-04-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.