Cognitive Debate

Question 1

Emotion - reliable (against)

Answer 1

Houstan et al. (2013) - independent groups design where pps viewed either a crime scenario (mugging) or a control scenario (conversation)
Experimental group recalled more info about the perpetrator than control participants, but were less able to describe the actions

Question 2

Emotion - unreliable (for)

Answer 2

Inverted U Theory

Peters (1998) - study that required pps to recall information about both the researcher and nurse after receiving an injection - recalled more information about the researcher

Question 3

Implications of Peters’ (1998) research

Answer 3

Social/Ethical: In extremely distressing scenarios, perpetrators may be incorrectly identified

Question 4

Implication/evaluation of Houstan et al.’s (2013) research

Answer 4

Low ecological validity and is not applicable to real crime or every type of crime

Question 5

Post-event information - unreliable (for)

Answer 5

Paterson et al. (2010) - independent groups in a lab environment, both watched the same video of a girl stealing a wallet. Co-witness and individual group (control). 71% in co-witness group recalled information they hadn’t seen

Question 6

Post-event information - reliable (against)

Answer 6

Loftus’ red purse study - participants were shown slides depicting a man stealing a large red purse, and participants had immediate recalls. They were then exposed to incorrect information (that the purse was brown), yet 98% still recalled the purse to be red

Question 7

Implications of Paterson’s (2010) research