EWT: Misleading information - A01

Question 1

What is misleading information in EWT?

Answer 1

When asked a question, the wording of the question may lead (or mislead) you to give a certain answer
This is a particular issue for EWT because police questions may direct a witness to give a particular answer

Question 2

What is the procedure of research into misleading information?

Answer 2

Loftus and palmer (1974): Arranged 45 PPs to watch film clips of car accidents and then asked them questions about the accident.
* In a critical question, PPs were asked to describe how fast the cars were travelling
* There were five groups of PPs and each group was given a different verb in the critical question
(Hit, smashed, collided, contacted, bumped)

Question 3

What is the findings of research into misleading information?

Answer 3

• The mean estimated speed was calculated for each PPs group
• The verb “contacted” resulted in a mean estimated speed of 31.8mph
• The verb “smashed” resulted in a mean estimated speed of 40.5mph
• The leading question biased the eyewitness’s recall of an event

Question 4

What is the response bias explanation?

Answer 4

Its suggests that the wording of the question has no real effect on the PPs memories, but just influences how they decide to answer the question
* When a PP gets a leading question using the word “smashed”, this encourages them to choose a higher speed estimate

Question 5

What is the subsititution explanation?

Answer 5

It suggests that the wording of the leading question changes the PPs memory

Question 6

What study supported the substitution explanation?

Answer 6

Loftus and Palmer (1974): conducted a second experiment that supported the substitition explanation.
The SE was shown because PPs who originally heard “smashed” were later more likely to report that there was glass there when there wasn’t any
The critical verb altered their memory of the incident

Question 7

What is Post event discussion?

Answer 7

Eyewitnesses to a crime may sometimes discuss their experiences and memories with each other.

Question 8

What is the procedure for research on post event discussion?

Answer 8

Gabbert et al. (2003): Studied in pairs
* Each PP watched a video clip of the same crime, but filmed from different points of view
* This meant that each PP can see elements of the clip that others could not
* Both PPs discussed what they had seen before individually completing a test of recall

Question 9

What are the findings for research on post event discussion?

Answer 9

• 71% of PPs mistakenly recalled aspects of the event that they did not see but had picked up in discussing
• In a control group it was 0%
• This is evidence for memory conformity

Question 10

Why does Post event discussion affect EWT?

Answer 10

• Memory conformity - when co-witnesses to a crime discuss it with each other, their eye witness testimonies become altered or distorted. This is because they combine information from other witnesses with their own memories
• Memory contamination - Gabbert et al. concluded that witnesses often go along with each other to win social approval or because they believe the other witnesses are right and they are wrong. Unlike with memory contamination the memory is unchanged