Accuracy of eyewitness testimony: Misleading information

Question 1

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
How many students where selected?

Answer 1

45

Question 2

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What were the students shown?

Answer 2

Seven different films of traffic accidents

Question 3

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What happened after each film?

Answer 3

Participants given a questionnaire

Question 4

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What did the questionnaire ask them to do?

Answer 4

Describe the accident and then answer a series of specific questions about it

Question 5

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What was the one CRITICAL question?

Answer 5

‘About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’

Question 6

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What did the four other groups get given when asking the question?

Answer 6

hit was replaces with

smashed, collided, bumped or contacted

Question 7

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 1
What were the results?

Answer 7

Verb Mean speed estimate
Smashed 40.8
Collided 39.3
Bumped 38.1
Hit 34.0
Contacted 31.8

Question 8

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
How many groups were there?

Answer 8

three groups

Question 9

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
What were the shown?

Answer 9

A film of a car accident lasting 1 minutes

Question 10

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
What happened after they were shown the film?

Answer 10

Asked questions about the speed

Question 11

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
What happened when the participants returned a week later?

Answer 11

Asked a series of 10 questions about the accident

Critical question being: ‘Did you see any broken glass?’

Question 12

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
Was there actually any broken glass?

Answer 12

NoPe

Question 13

Key study: Loftus and Palmer ( 1974)
Experiment 2
What do the results conclude?

Answer 13

That the leading question does change tthe actual memory a participant had of a event

Question 14

How might memory also be altered?

Answer 14

Discussing events with others and/or being questioned multiple times

Question 15

What did Fiona Gabbert investigate?

Answer 15

Co-witnesses may reach a consensus view of what actually happened

Question 16

What did Fiona Gabbert’s investigation involve?

Answer 16

Participants were in pairs each partner watched a different video of the same event so that they each viewed unique items

Question 17

What were pairs in the first condition encouraged to do?

Answer 17

Discuss the event before each partner individually recalled the event they watched

Question 18

What was concluded from Gabbert’s investigation?

Answer 18

A very high number of witnesses (71%) who had discussed the event went on to mistakenly recall items acquired during the discussion

Question 19

What is there a possibility of when an interview is repeated?

Answer 19

Comments from the interviewer are incorporated into the recollection of events

Question 20

Supporting evidence

Answer 20

Considerable support for research on the effect of misleading information

• Loftus study involving Bugsy bunny
• College students who had visited Disneyland as children
• Asked to evaluate advertising material about Disneyland containing

Question 21

Real-world application

Answer 21

Application to the criminal justice system
-Psychological research has been used to warn the justice system of problems with eyewitness identification evidence
- Wells and Olson (2003) DNA exoneration cases have confirmed the warnings of eyewitness identification researchers by showing that mistalen eyewitness identification was the largest single factor contributing to the conviction of these innocent people
Demonstrates the importance of EWT research to ensure that innocent people are not convicted

Question 22

Individual differences

Answer 22

Investigating EWT concerns individual differences of witnesses
- An eyewitness typically acquires information from two sources
> Observation the event
> Subsequent suggestions
- Schacter et al.(1991), elderly people have difficulty remembering the source of their information, even though their memory is impaired
- Prone to the effect of misleading information
Suggests that individual differences, age in particular, are an important factor when assessing the reliability of EWT

Question 23

It may be response bias

Answer 23

Criticism of Loftus and Palmer’s research into EWT
- Leading questions changed the original memory
- Bekerian and Bowers ( 1983) replicated
- Participants are susceptible to misleading information if questions are presented in the same order as original data
> Loftus did it random order
- Order of question has a significant effect and therefore memory change
Alternative explanation to Loftus and Palmer and highlights the importance of question order in police interviews