CLOA - extent of reliability of a cognitive process Flashcards
importance of questioning eyewitness reliability
- criminal justice system relies heavily on eyewitness testimony
- The Innocence Project provides assistance to wrongly convicted people to help prove their innocence
- over 75% of the 220 people they helped were convicted due to mistaken eyewitness identification
- Eakin et al. (2003): even when warned about the presence of misleading info, participants were still vulnerable to it
Main studies:
- Loftus et al. (1987)
- Deffenbacher et al. (2004)
Counter-studies:
- Riniolo et al. (2003)
- Yuille and Cutshall (1983)
Loftus et al. (1987) - Aim
- investigate how repression may influence memories
- (thus leading to unreliable answers from eyewitnesses)
Loftus et al. (1987) - Process
- Participants overhear a discussion in the room next door
- There were 2 conditions (i.e. groups)
- no weapon condition (man with greasy hands emerges, holding a pen)
- weapon condition (man with bloody paper knife emerges) - Participants were asked to identify the man from a selection of 50 people
Loftus et al. (1987) - Findings
participants from no-weapon condition more accurate in recollection
Loftus et al. (1987) - Conclusion
- participants’ attention was drawn to presence of weapons
- so less attention paid to man’s facial features
- weapon may also have influenced participants’ anxiety levels, affecting the reliability of their memory
- therefore eyewitness testimony is unreliable
Deffenbacher et al. (2004)
- conducted meta-analyses of studies investigating the role of emotion on eyewitness testimony
- found that anxiety and stress reduces the reliable recall of crime details
- including information about the behaviour of the main characters
- but some studies suggest that anxiety and stress seem to improve eyewitness accuracy
- suggested that increases of anxiety up to a certain level increase accuracy but further increases may produce the opposite effect
Riniolo et al. (2003)
found that eyewitness memory of the sinking of the Titanic was accurate
Loftus and Palmer (1974)
- mean estimates were highest in smashed condition and lowest in contacted
- results indicate that memory can be manipulated by using specific words (hence, is unreliable)
- critical word in the question consistently affected participant answers
- the use of different words may have influenced participants mental representation/memory reconstruction of the accident (activating diff schemas using the critical word)
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
- interviewed 13 witnesses to an armed robbery in Canada 5 months after the crime
- the interview questions utilized a similar technique to Loftus and Palmer (1974) – the use of ‘leading questions’ to mislead the participants
- their recollections of the crime were compared with the initial detailed reports they had given to the police
- despite the leading questions, recollections very closely matched original reports
extent of memory reliability
- memory is an active reconstructive process
- every time a memory is recalled, stored info is altered
- one is forced to simplify by relying on prior knowledge
- schemas are facilitators in comprehension and memorisation
- helps to enable more effortless and efficient processing
- but schematic processing can lead to error and distortion
- should be noted that in all studies, the gist of the situation was correctly recalled
- but memory of specific details may have been influenced upon recall
- thus eyewitness testimony is fallible and should not be overly relied upon
conclusion: to what extent is one cognitive process reliable?
- memory is an active reconstructive process
- Bransford and Johnson (1972) established schemas as great facilitators in the comprehension and memorization of information
- hence, reconstruction =! distortion
- however, that doesn’t mean schematic processing won’t cause error/distortion
- much empirical evidence for and against reliability
- research addressing specific factors or processes can no doubt help us predict the circumstances in which eyewitness testimony will be reliable or unreliable
- to conclude, more research on the factors are necessary to establish a suitable conclusion
what to write when asked “to what extent is one cognitive process reliable?”
- cognitive process: memory
factors affecting memory reliability:
- weapon focus: Loftus et al (1987)
- high emotional arousal: Deffenbacher et al (2004) vs Riniolo et al. (2003)
- leading questions: Loftus and Palmer (1974) vs Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
- NOTE THAT LOFTUS’ AND DEFFENBACHER’S STUDIES ARE LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS WHILE YUILLE’S AND RINIOLO’S ARE CASE STUDIES – analyse the difference between real-life and experimental situations
- discuss the validity of the arguments
- give judgment by emphasizing some arguments over others
- give judgment on the relative importance of the factors on the behaviour: how important is ____ and why?
- present all opinions with evidence
- conclusion: evaluate the extent of reliability