EWT Flashcards
Misleading information
What is the key study for misleading information?
Hint: loftus
7ish points
Showed 150 ps a film of a car accident
Then split in to two groups : controlled group asked 10 questions consistent with the film such as ‘how fast was car going when it passed stop sign?’
Experimental group asked 10 questions that were inconsistent with film including ‘how fast were cars going when they passed the barn?’
Misleading because was NO barn
One week later all given another 10 questions. Last question ‘did you see a barn?’
Controlled group - 2.7% said yes
Experimental - 17.3% said yes
Concluded that non existent barn added at interview stage and now had become part of original memory
Misleading information
A03 weakness
This study shows witnesses can be misled however important to realise roughly 80% of the experimental group were NOT misled.
Misleading information
A03 strength
Contradictory evidence shows that misleading info may not affect accuracy of EWT…
Loftus conducted a study where ps watched film of theft of a large red purse.
Ps then read a professors account of the theft with several inaccuracies, one of these inaccuracies was that the report stated the theft was of a brown purse
Ps not affected by it and many recalled it as being correctly red
Shows ps not vulnerable to being misled by blatantly incorrect information
Leading questions
Key study by loftus and palmer?
Showed ps a film of car accident and asked crucial question of ‘what speed were the vehicles traveling when they hit?’
Word hit replaced with collided, smashed, contacted, bumped etc for different groups
A week later ps asked if they had seen any broken glass
Contacted 32mph
Smashed 41mph
Those in smashed group more likely to answer yes to broken glass question
Leading questions
A03 strength
Supporting evidence comes from loftus study
Showed specific wording of questions affected accuracy of EWT
Loftus showed ps film of car accident and split into 2 groups. One group asked ‘did you see A broken headlight’ second group asked ‘did you see THE broken headlight’
Those in the ‘THE’ group twice as likely to answer yes to question
Post event discussion
Key study by gabbert et al
(A)PFC
Investigated memory conformity affects between individuals who witness and then discuss criminal event
60 students 60 older adults
Ps in pairs
All watched film of girl returning library book to unoccupied office that was empty
Each partner watched same video but from different angle to stimulate different witness perspectives
Con 1 = experimental con had to discuss event
Con 2 = control con not allowed to discuss
Found 71% of witnesses who discussed event recalled wrong info. No age related differences
Concluded memory conformity in condition 1 probs result of informational social influence as want to be good witness
Post event discussion
A03 strength
The Oklahoma bombing (168 people dead)
3 witness worked at truck rental shop where the bomber McVeigh used in bombing
One of the 3 witnesses claimed they saw McVeigh with accomplice. Other 2 didn’t report witnesses but later did. Sparked hunt for accomplice
Months later first witness said they made a mistake and was no accomplice
Confidence of him influenced others to recall second man
Witnesses admitted they had discussed their memories before being questioned
Post event discussion
Support A03
Studies shown ps interviewed multiple times recall things incorrectly as post event discussion incorporates new memories into original event
Comments or leading qs from interviewer will affect their memory of event
Anxiety
Explain Yerkes Dodson Law theory
Increased in arousal improves performance in EWT but only up to point
When arousal passed critical point called optimum performance declines
Possible witnessing violence raises witnesses arousal past optimum leading to poor memory performance
Anxiety
Theory of weapon focus
Witnesses tend in violent crimes to focus attention to weapon and this results in poor quality EWT as the witness can’t describe much about other aspects of incidence
Presence of weapon increases anxiety levels
Anxiety
Key study supporting weapon focus?
Loftus
Asked ps to wait in a room when they arrived for an experiment
During this wait ps overheard either :
Low key discussion in lab about equipment failure. Person left with greasy hands holding a pen
Heated argument heard breaking class and crashing chairs then person left holding paper knife with blood
Ps given 50 photos asked to identify man
Pen group -49% accurate
Knife group -33% accurate
Ps less accurate as focusing on weapon
Anxiety
Support A03
Violence can cause anxiety
Loftus made ps watch film of crime
Some ps watched version where young boy shot in face
Other ps watched less violent version
Those who saw on violent version recalled better and more detail
Shock of event disrupted other details before and after actual violent scene
Anxiety
Supporting evidence A03
Health
Health clinic study people receiving inoculations (anxiety causing event)
Met researcher and nurse for brief but equal amounts of time
One week later ps asked to identify nurse and researcher from photos
Researcher better recognised as anxiety of injection directly affected accuracy of memory
Anxiety
Loftus supporting evidence A03 for weapon focus
Loftus
Monitored gaze of ps when watching video about robbery
Found focused gaze on gun used
When questioned ps less able to identify robber and recall details of crime than ps who watched version without gun
General evaluation for ALL EWT research
Good applications? Report
Helped our understanding of EWT and prevented convincing information that the 4 factors can affect memory of original event
Loftus findings important in writing of the devlin report which stated EWT could not result in conviction alone in English court without other corroborating evidence
PED studies shown memory can be distorted so led to cognitive interview
General evaluation for ALL EWT research
Criticism
Lacks ecological validity as lacks stress and emotion
…and supporting study?
Lacks stress and emotion of real life.
Supporting evidence comes from study of real robbery in gun shop in Canada shown real life witnesses to real crime are better witnesses
Psychologists examined recall of witnesses to a shorting in town in Canada. Man tried to rob gun shop, shop owner shot and robber killed
Incidence happened in daylight loads of witnesses
Months after event tracked down witnesses to take part in study found that;
Witnesses could recall in high detail
High level of agreement between witnesses
Did not alter to leading questions
Findings contrary to what loftus would lead us to expect cast doubt on EV of loftus studies
General evaluation for ALL EWT research
Lacks ecological validity because no consequences….. study
No consequences in lab experiments
Ps in experiments less accurate as know inaccuracies won’t lead to serious consequences
Study
Ps shown video of bank robbery and asked to indentify robber from identity parade. Half ps believed robbery was real and there responses would influence trial. Other half knew it was stimulation.
Identification more accurate in first group suggesting consequences important factor
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
The cognitive interview is based on what two principles of memory?
1) info organised so memories can be accessed in number of ways
2) memories are context dependent meaning retrieval will be more effective if cues present at time of recall
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
What happens in cognate every interviews? What do they do include etc
4 points
No set questions and no time limit so witnesses not pressured
Open questions to reduce chance of leading questions
Interviewer stays silent
Interviewer record and take notes
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
What 4 techniques used?
Reinstate the context
Change sequence
Change perspective
Report everything
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
Describe technique of reinstate the context
Witness returned in their mind to situation event occurred
Attempts made to recreate mood and environment in mind of witness
Asked to think back to before during and after think about weather etc
Should produce cues to trigger recall
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
Describe change sequence
Cognitive interviews will ask witnesses to recall events in different orders and maybe reverse order
Ensure important details not missed out and will help fill in any gaps
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
Describe change perspective
Witness asked to recall events from another perspective
But asked to report what they actually know and not be imaginative
General evaluation for ALL EWT research - the cognitive interview
Report everything, describe
Witnesses encouraged to report everything even if it seems irrelevant
This unrestrained recall likely to throw up details which may of been mentally ‘edited out’
Evaluation of the cognitive interview
Strength - it is effective!
Psychologist published empirical test of CI.
With little training, interviewers gained up to 35% more correct details and had no increase in errors
This was replicated in numerous studies with both adults and children
Also found to increase accuracy in people with learning disabilities, senior citizens and very young children
Evaluation of the cognitive interview
Weakness time???
Interviews with police found problems with CI in practise.
Suggest it requires more time than they have and prefer normal strategies as aimed to limit witnesses response to minimum amount of information officer feels is necessary
Getting info FAST important to catch criminal before they can espcape
Evaluation of the cognitive interview
Weakness type of interviewer?
It’s a form of communication and its success depends on skills of interviewer.
They can be trained but difficult to assess how good they really are as not just following learned technical skills.
Easy for inexperienced interviewer to ask questions that may ‘lead’ the witness
So CI may just lead to same problems as normal interviews
Evaluation of the cognitive interview
2 small criticisms
Only helps with recall not recognition so may not help with recognising culprit in photos etc
CI most effective when interview shortly after event. Becomes less effective as time between event and recall increases
