I'm definitely not "qualified" and I'm not an "expert" (or even vaguely informed), but after reading four of other papers from Jeremy Bailenson, I can tell you

I'm definitely not "qualified" and I'm not an "expert" (or even vaguely informed), but after reading four of other papers from Jeremy Bailenson, I can tell you this much; he tends to write in an easily readable and approachable style, and gives solid support both through his own data and prior research references. The phase "source monitoring" is a term of the (academic) trade, and as far as I know, it roughly means, being aware (monitoring) of how our experiences are occurring and have occurred in the past (i.e. from various sources). For example, did you read it in a book? Or read it in an article? Or see it happen live? Or see it in a movie? Or hear it happen live? Or hear it told to you second-hand? Or are you remembering it from a dream you had? Or ... The methods by which our experiences occur has an impact on how they are perceived, and an impact on how they are later remembered. Though "false memories" sure seems like bad linkbait phrase to use in a title, it's also a term of the academic trade. It means you're unable to differentiate between memories of actual "live" experiences you've had in real life, and memories of perceived or "make believe" experiences. The paper cites previous work showing how children are more susceptible to false memories in general than adults, and then goes on to show how children are especially susceptible to false memories induced through immersive virtual reality. If I'm _really_ lucky, maybe someone from the Stanford Virtual Human Interaction Lab (VHIL) will show up and correct me where I'm wrong, but the above is the best I can give you.