Previous research suggests that even after providing evidence, which falsifies the fundamental information, people often reject the new and accept the former. This has been thought to be because ‘people prefer to have an incorrect event-model to having an incomplete event-model’ (Ecker, Lewandowsky, & Tang, in press; H. M. Johnson & Seifert, 1994; van …show more content…
In some cases influence is adversely affected, such as, when there is a substitute explanation. An example would be that until a jury is provided with an alternative suspect, the current suspect would remain guilty despite presenting an alibi (Ecker, Lewandowsky, Apia, 2011, p284).
According to Ecker et al (2007), emotion can fundamentally affect the renewal and registration of memories. A common belief is information that emotionally affects an individual, for instance a traumatic experience, can lead to animated memories which are referred to as ‘flashbulb memories’ (Brown & Kulik, 1977; Christianson & Loftus 1990). In spite of their highly descriptive traits even ‘flashbulb memories’ are susceptible to errors when rebuilding memories (Christianson, 1989; McCloskey, Wible & Cohen, 1988; Neiser & Harsch, 1992; Schmidt, 2004).
Notwithstanding, a certain aspect of information retrieval, referred to as the source-monitoring framework