Lost but not forgotten details: repeated eyewitness recall leads to reminiscence but not hypermnesia.

In 2 experiments, the effects on participants' memory and confidence of repeatedly describing a videotaped crime and of the opportunity to review a previous description were investigated. E. Scrivner and M. A. Safer (1988) demonstrated that witnesses' successive attempts to describe such events can lead to the recall of more new information in comparison with the amount forgotten (i.e., increased net recall, or hypermnesia). In Experiment 1, a more forensically relevant procedure was used, and no support for hypermnesia was found. Witnesses did recall significantly more new information across attempts, but the amount did not exceed how much was forgotten (i.e., increased gross recall, or reminiscence). The opportunity to review a previous statement had no effect on the number of items recalled. In Experiment 2, the more traditional, repeated-recall procedure used by Scrivner and Safer was applied, and their finding of hypermnesia was replicated with the present study's materials.