Eyewitness Misinformation Susceptibility Across Data Collection Contexts: Comparing Laboratory, Online, and Prolific Participant Responses

1 citations

Abstract

In recent years, many eyewitness misinformation studies have moved from face-to-face to online data collection. However, the impact of different data collection contexts on misinformation susceptibility has not yet been investigated. In Study 1, we compared results from the same experiment conducted in two different data collection contexts–in person in a Laboratory and online via the recruitment platform Prolific–and found that Prolific participants were both less accurate overall and more susceptible to misinformation. Furthermore, we replicated a previous finding that increased visual perceptual load in a scene reduces eyewitness recall accuracy, but observed this effect in the Laboratory group only. In Study 2, we added a General Online group to test whether these differences extended to all online data collection, or if they were specific to Prolific participants. Misinformation susceptibility in the General Online group was similar to the Laboratory group, and significantly lower than that in the Prolific group. However, perceptual load effects were also absent in the General Online group. Ultimately, these findings indicate that different data collection contexts yield varying results in eyewitness misinformation studies. Researchers should exercise caution when selecting recruitment approaches, as attentional engagement and experimental control differ across contexts.

1
Citations
Research
Paper Only

Study specs

Two studies were conducted comparing eyewitness misinformation susceptibility across Laboratory, Prolific, and General Online participant groups under varying visual perceptual load conditions.

Discipline
Psychology
Study Type
Experimental Study
Year
2025
Human Data Platform
Prolific

Measured Outcomes

Eyewitness misinformation susceptibility and recall accuracy across Laboratory, Prolific, and General Online participant groups; the effect of visual perceptual load on recall accuracy.

Peer Review & Critical Discussion

3 threads

Potential Selection Bias in 2023 Cohort

DSJDr. Sarah J.
Verified PhD Candidate
12 replies

The participant pool shows a concerning overrepresentation of users from high-income demographics. Looking at Table 3, we can see that 78% of respondents had annual incomes above $75k, which significantly limits the generalizability of these findings to broader populations.

2 hours ago

Non-naive Participants Issue

MCM. Chen (OpenAI)
Data Scientist
8 replies

I've noticed a methodological concern regarding participant naivety. Given that Prolific users often complete multiple studies, there's a real risk that participants had prior exposure to similar experimental paradigms, which could confound the results.

5 hours ago

RLHF Applicability to This Study Design

PRWProf. R. Williams
Verified Researcher
15 replies

The implications for RLHF training pipelines are understated. If we accept the authors' conclusions about preference stability, this has direct consequences for how we should structure reward model training. The temporal decay effect described in Section 4.2 is particularly relevant.

1 day ago

Verify your expertise to join discussion

Create an account and verify your credentials to participate in peer discussions.