EWT - Misleading info

Question 1

what are the two aspects of misleading info?

Answer 1

leading questions & post-event info

Question 2

leading questions

Answer 2

attempt to guide the person to answer in a particular way to give a desired answer

Question 3

post event info

Answer 3

new information, which is untrue, given after an event with the potential to influence the memory of it

Question 4

leading questions research example

Answer 4

LOFTUS (1974)
- lab = 45 US students shown a car accident video & then answered a questionnaire
- IV = different verb - smashed (fastest), collided, bumped, hit, contacted (slowest)

Question 4

what was concluded on the leading question research?

Answer 4

leading questions have a big effect on distorting info accuracy

Question 5

post event info research example - followed leading questions research

Answer 5

• the previous participants were asked if they saw any broken glass
• ‘hit’ = 14%
• ‘smashed’ = 32%
• actually no broken glass

Question 6

post event info research example

Answer 6

LOFTUS (1975)
- lab = 150 US students shown video of a car accident & had 10 Qs
- control group Q = ‘how fast was the white sports car going when travelling along the country road?’
- experimental group = same Q but ‘when it passed the barn’
- there was NO barn
- 1 week later ‘did you see the barn?’
- control was 2% yes and experimental was 17%

Question 7

explaining post-event discussion effects

Answer 7

CONFORMITY EFFECT - GABBERT ET AL (2003)
- people were encouraged to discuss an event witnessed from different perspectives
- 71% went on to recall something the other person had told them about
REPEAT INTERVIEWING
- as seen in LOFTUS = comments & leading questions can effect subsequent interviews

Question 8

EVALUATION = positives

Answer 8

LAB EXPERIMENTS
- highly controlled, extraneous variables etc
- cause & effect confidently stated
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
- BRAUN ET AL (2002) = memories of bugs bunny & ariel at disneyland when it wasn’t possible
APPLIED TO OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM
- less reliance on EWTs

Question 9

EVALUATION - limitations

Answer 9

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
- elderly are more prone to misleading info effects - they might have more difficulty recalling the original source so are more prone to the effects
LOFTUS LACKED ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY
- FOSTER (1994) = Ps who thought it was real crime had higher accuracy so may have less effect in real life
- YUILLE & CUTSHALL = 4 months after robbery & despite being given 2 misleading questions, EWs still remained accurate (only 1 time tho)