eye witness testimony Flashcards
the cognitive interview
developed by fisher and geisalman
to increase the accuracy of eyewitness testimony
1) report everything - the witness is asked to recall every detail from the event even details considered irrelevant in order to act as a cue for more relevant memories seemingly trivial memories may be important
2) reinstate the context- the witness is asked to recall the contextual details of the event for example things heard before or during their feelings during the event- this is related to context dependant forgetting.
3) reverse the order- the witness is asked to retell the events non chronologically this is done to prevent the witnesses reporting based on expectations of how the events should have happened
4) change perspective- recalling events from another person involved perspective to reduce the effect of schema on accuracy of witness testimony
enhanced cognitive interview
fisher added additional elements of the cognitive interview to focus on the social dynamics of the situation for example the interviewer needs to know when to establish eye contact and when to relinquish it
also focuses on asking open ended questions reducing distractions and reducing anxiety.
cognitive interview positives
+ evidence that is works meta analysis conducted by konken who combined data from 55 studies and found that there was a 41% increase in accuracy compared with standard interview
only four studies showed no difference
HOWEVER konken also found an increase in the amount of incorrect information recalled and this was a particular issue in the enhanced ci as more incorrect infiormation was reported in the eci than the ci.
cognitive interview negatives
- not all elements are equally effective or useful milne found that using the report everything and reinstate the context produced better ewt results confirming police expectations that some work better than others. however it is hard to compare because a puck and mix approach is applied
- cognitive interview is time consuming time needed to allow them to relax and special training needs to be provided to officers suggesting always implementing the ci is an unrealistic standard for officers
factors affecting eyewitness testimony- LOFTUS AND PALMER
LOFTUS AND PALMER- investigated the effect of leading questions on accuracy of EWT.
all participants watched the same video of a crash
five groups of participants were asked the same question but with a different verb for each group
‘estimate the speed of the vehicle when it HIT/COLLIDED WITH/ CONTACTED/ SMASHED/BUMPED into the other vehicle.’
the group with the verb contacted predicted an average speed of 31.8mph
the group with the verb smashed predicted an average speed of 40.5mph
factors affecting eye witness testimony- post event discussion
GABBERT- conducted research on pairs of participants and a control group of individually tested participants
all watched a video of a girl stealing money from a wallet but from differet perspectives meaning some saw differnet aspects to others
findings- 71% of pps in pairs gave answers consisting of information that was not in their video
compared with 0% in the control.
evaluation of gabbert research
lack ecological validity- wouldn’t pay as close attention to a real crime compared to a video clip- aware that they were going to be tested so studied the video with more detail.
+good population validity tested both adults and younger generations- little difference between these conditions meaning that adults and young people can respond to post event discussion similarly.
memory contamination PED
when a memory is distorted following post event discussion combining own memories with gained information from post event discussion
memory conformity PED
when a person conforms to the other persons story of events because they want to gain social approval or because of informational social influence. unlike the contamination hypothesis, the original memory of the events is unchanged, he person is simply conforming, not internalising.
EVALUATION OF MISLEADING INFO
- questionale ecological validity– in reports of real witnesses to car accuidents they very rarely watch the entire vent unfold as the participants did with the video. it is also unclaer if witnesses to a real crash with a stronger emotional connection to the event would respond to leading questions in the same way
- lacks population validity difficult to widely generalise- 45 and 150 american students- less experienced drivers therefore lower accuracy in score guessing, more likely to be influenced by manipulation of verb choice
+high degree of conrtol- lab of washington university, standardised procedure able to be replicated
+ RWA- psychologists asked to act as experts in EWT
effects of anxiety on accuracy of EWT- negative impact research
JOHNSON AND SCOTT
weapon focus—
independent groups design, participants beleived they were waiting to complete a lab experiment in a reception
two conditions-> no weapon, overheard a heated discussion about lab equipt not working
saw an individual leave the lab holding a pen with greasy hands.
Weapon, overheard heated discussion, glass smashing and chair being thrown. individual leaves holding a blooded knife.
pps asked to identify the individual out of 50 photos
49% recall in non weapon
33% recall in weapon
TUNNEL VISION AND RECALL THEORY
anxiety has a positive effect on recall research
Yuivill and Cutshall- anxiety in real life shooting
21 witnesses to a shopkeeper shooting a theif dead, 13 took part in resaerch
interviewed4-5 months after event and asked to rate anxiety on a 7 point scale
this was compared to real police interview straight after event
those with highest anxiety scores had the most accurate recollection
results were very similar despite time illustrating anxiety and fight or flight arousal actually assists testimony due to enhanced alertness
evaluation of J and S anxiety negative effect
lack of face validity- might not have actually been measuring anxiety but surprise or shock due to the presence of a weapon
