Cognitive Approach Debate Flashcards
Why is this a controversial debate
The reliability of eyewitness testimony (EWT) is a widely debated issue. There
have been cases of wrongful conviction due to EWT errors. In 1969.
- Laslow Virag was wrongfully convicted for stealing from parking meters, after an
eyewitness identified him. The conviction was despite contradictory evidence and an alibi.
- Virag was released from prison when the real culprit was found.
- In 1976, Lord Devlin investigated this issue and recommended that no one should be convicted on the basis of EWT alone.
- However this is a recommendation only
and not law. As such further miscarriages of justice continue to occur due to unreliable EWT. In 2007. William Mills from Glasgow spent six months in prison
for a bank robbery he did not commit.
- This begs the question, is EWT reliable enough to be used in the Justice system?
Eyewitnesses are not reliable due to post-event
information:
Numerous studies show that information that on eyewitness receives AFTER the
event (e.g leading question) can distort memory therefore making EWT unreliable.
- Loflus and Palmers (1974) study
- Furthermore Loftus and Zanni (1975)
- Both of these studies illustrate that even subtle changes in the wording of a question received after the event can change the memory of the Ppts making it unreliable.
Loftus and Palmer study found?
showed that Ppts in the ‘smashed’ condition gave higher speed estimates (40.8 mph) than those in the contacted condition (31.8 mph). The researchers concluded thought eyewitnesses memories are made up of two things: What the actually see at the time and then information they receive after the event. Overtime these combine to make one memory, which may be different from the event they witnessed.
Loftus and Zanni found that?
found 7% that of those asked ‘did you see a broken headlight’ reported seeing one where 17% of those asked ‘did you see the broken headlight?’ reported seeing one.
Eyewitnesses ARE reliable despite misleading post event information.
- Studies like Loftus and Palmer tend to focus on details that are tricky for us to estimate (e g speed) or details that are not central to the crime.
- As such these details may be more susceptible to distortion.
- Studies have shown that for key details EWT tends to be more accurate. Loftus (1979) showed Ppts slides of a man stealing a red purse. The ppts were then exposed to misleading information including information that the purse was brown. Ppts were inaccurate for minor details but correctly remembered that the purse was red.
- This suggests that eyewitness recollection for important details may be more resistant to post-event information and therefore more reliable than previously suggested.
The AGE of a witness can make them
unreliable
- Children may be particularly unreliable due To their desire to please adults, there are more affected by suggestion and prone To fantasy
- A group of 9-year-olds and a group of 14-year-olds were introduced to a confederate. Later in the day they were asked to pick a photo of the confederate from a line up up, even though their photo wasn’t present.
- 9-year-olds chose a photo from the line-up. whilst 14-year-olds didn’t.
- It was suggested that younger children are more likely to make a false identification as they have been reinforced to trust adults from a young age and their desire to please adults overrides their desire to be accurate.
- Schaefer et al 1991
- Therefore, an eyewitness testimony account from a very youngor old person is more likely to contain errors and be unreliable.
age doesn’t lead to an unreliable witness:
- Davis et al (1989) reviewed literature on child eyewitnesses and came to the following conclusions:
- Children between the ages of 6-7 and 10-11 are fairly accurate in their memories of an event, they do not usually ‘make things up’
- A child’s memory is not significantly changed by adult suggestion after the event.
- These conclusions challenge claims made by other researchers that EWT from a child is inaccurate.
- Anastasi and Rhodes
- Therefore, a witness to o crime committed by someone of a similar age is likely to be more accurate suggesting older and younger witnesses CAN be reliable.
Crimes are emotive experiences and s
the emotion will affect accuracy of
memory:
- Eyewitnesses may be unreliable bc the crimes the witness are unexpected and emotionally traumatising. Freud argues that painful or threatening memories are pushed Into the UM.
- This is an e.g. of an ego defence mechanism called repression which helps the ego manage anxiety but, effectively means that these painful memories are forgotten.
- A similar but more contemporary explanation is motivated forgetting’ which argues that people forget unwanted memories. either consciously or unconsciously.
Crimes are emotive experiences but this may make EWT more reliable:
- Some psychologists argue that when we experience
emotionally shocking events or those that hold personal significance, we create a very accurate and long-lasting memory. - This is known as a flashbulb memory. There is also evidence that hormones such as adrenaline may improve the storage of the memories.
- Consequently, the emotion surrounding a crime may actually make EWT more reliable.
Memories arc reconstructive (our memory is affected by other cognitive factors e.g. schemas)
- Schemas help us process information quickly however this can lead to distortions in memory.
- e.g. in your ‘criminal’ schema, you will have an expectation of what a criminal will look like.
- Yarmey (1993) asked 240 students to look at videos of 30 unknown males and classify them as either ‘good or ‘bad’ guys.
- They found that there was high agreement suggesting there is similarity in information stored in’good’ and’bad’ guy schemas.
- This suggests that due to schemas, eyewitnesses may pick the person who most looks like a criminal rather than the actual criminal and therefore be inaccurate.
Memory might be reconstructive but it N\
doesn’t make it unreliable:
- In many crimes the victim knows the perpetrator of the crime therefore they do not need to refer to their schemas making their EWT reliable.
- Rape Crisis reports that 90% of rapists are known to their victims meaning they are able to correctly identify their attacker.
- Most research into reliability of EWT is carried out in lab environments therefore the findings may not be generalizable to real life EWT.
Yuile and Cutshall found that eye witnesses for a real life armed robbery were still accurate 4 months after the event and despite 2 pieces of misleading information. - If memory is reconstructive then it would be expected that the witnesses recollections would have faded and become less accurate over time. However, Yuille CutshaIl’s research clearly shows the opposite and that real life EWT IS accurate.
essay structure?
- Eyewitness reliable
- EWT not reliable
- Age makes unreliable
- Age does not make unreliable
- Emotion will affect memory
- Emotion may make EWT more reliable
- Conclusion
essay structure?
- Eyewitness reliable
- EWT not reliable
- Age makes unreliable
- Age does not make unreliable
- Emotion will affect memory
- Emotion may make EWT more reliable
- memories = reconstructive
- memory might be ^ but it doesn’t make it unreliable
- Ethical, Social, Economic
- Conclusion
Ethical implications of this debate?
Huff et al (1986) reported that nearly 60% of 500 cases of wrongful convictions involved eyewitness identification errors. This has serious
implications ethical implications for both the victim of the crime and the wrongly convicted. The victim will not get the justice they deserve. The wrongly convicted may spend time in prison, suffer reputational damage, experience the breakdown of relationships with loved ones and carry a criminal record. The ability to convict on the basis EWT alone when it may be inaccurate raises big ethical concerns.
Social implications of this debate?
There are social implications when EWT results In the wrong person being convicted this means that the real perpetrator is able to walk free in society and commit further crimes. Therefore, unreliable EWT poses a
threat to the safety of society.
- HOWEVER, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE} 1984/1995 offers a code of practice concerning carrying out identification attempts. For
example leading questions cannot be asked. This should help make EWT more accurate.
