6.1.7 Factors Influencing Eye Witness Testimony Flashcards
EWT
Evidence given by people who witnessed a crime. E.g. sequence of events.
- Post Event Information
- Misinformation, real info and false info is blended
- Leading questions, lead to wrong remembrance
- Schemas, may confabulate, rationalise or simplify based on schemas
Strength of Post Event Info
Loftus and Palmer
- 40.8 smashed
- 34.0 hit
- Shows leading questions can impact how we perceive the event afterwards
- 16/50 smashed
- 7/50 hit
Weakness of Post Event Info
Yuille and Cutshall
- After 5 months and 2 leading questions about broken headlight
- 10/13 reported no broken headlight
- New info has no impact
Strength of misinformation
Gabbert
- 71% referred to details they couldn’t have seen after a crime
Weakness of Misinformation
Loftus
- 98% remembered right bag colour
- No effect when misinformation is blatantly wrong
- Weapon Focus
Concentration on weapon and the reduction in concentration of other details of the crime.
Strength of Weapon Focus
Johnson and Scott
- 2 groups
- One heard quiet discussion and saw man with pen (49% correct identification)
- One heard loud argument and saw man with knife (33% correct identification)
- Focus on weapon because it’s threatening takes away from identification of person and therefore other crime details
Weakness of Weapon Focus
Flashbulb Memories
- Highly emotionally significant moments lead to high detail memories
- Stress and Arousal
Yerkes-Dodson Law. Increase in arousal improves performance up to a point. Under and over arousal may lead to decline in memory.
Strength of Stress and Arousal
Valentine and Mesout
- High anxiety levels reduce ability to identify perpetrator
- Emotional fear state influences reliability of eyewitness testimony
Weakness of Stress and Arousal
Criticism
- Hard to operationalise
- Hard to compare
- Different definers for arousal and stress levels