Eye witness testimony A01 Flashcards
What is a strength of using laboratory experiments to study eyewitness testimony?
A strength is that laboratory experiments, such as Loftus and Palmer’s (1974) study on misleading information, allow researchers to control extraneous variables. This makes it easier to establish cause-and-effect relationships and test specific hypotheses about factors influencing eyewitness memory, such as the effect of leading questions.
What is a limitation of using laboratory experiments to study eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that laboratory experiments often lack ecological validity. The controlled settings may not replicate the stress, distractions, and complexities present in real-life situations, which could affect how eyewitnesses process and recall events. Thus, findings may not always generalize to real-world eyewitness testimonies.
What is a strength of the research on the misinformation effect in eyewitness testimony?
A strength is that the misinformation effect, demonstrated in studies like Loftus and Palmer (1974), is supported by a significant amount of empirical evidence. This research has shown how leading questions or exposure to incorrect post-event information can distort memories, making it a reliable and well-established phenomenon in psychology.
What is a limitation of the misinformation effect in explaining eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that the misinformation effect may not fully explain all instances of memory distortion in eyewitness testimony. Some studies have suggested that eyewitnesses may be able to distinguish between accurate and misleading information, challenging the idea that all memory distortion is caused by post-event information.
What is a strength of using real-life studies (e.g., Yuille and Cutshall, 1986) in understanding eyewitness testimony?
A strength is that real-life studies provide high ecological validity because they investigate eyewitnesses in naturalistic settings. Yuille and Cutshall’s study of eyewitnesses to a real-life shooting showed that people can recall accurate details even under stressful conditions, challenging the idea that anxiety always impairs memory.
What is a limitation of real-life studies in investigating eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that real-life studies often have low control over variables, making it difficult to establish cause-and-effect relationships. Factors such as the passage of time, emotional distress, and subsequent media exposure can influence memory recall, complicating the interpretation of results and the application of findings.
How does the weapon focus effect critique the reliability of eyewitness testimony?
The weapon focus effect suggests that when a weapon is present in a crime, eyewitnesses tend to focus more on the weapon than on other details, such as the appearance of the perpetrator. This reduced attention to key features can lead to inaccuracies in identifying the culprit or recalling other important details of the event.
What is a limitation of the weapon focus effect in explaining eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that the weapon focus effect may not always apply. Some studies have shown that eyewitnesses can remember other aspects of a crime scene (e.g., the perpetrator’s face) even when a weapon is present, suggesting that other factors, such as individual differences or the severity of the crime, can influence memory accuracy.
What is a strength of using the cognitive interview to improve eyewitness testimony?
A strength of the cognitive interview is that it has been shown to enhance the accuracy of eyewitness recall. Techniques like context reinstatement and reporting everything (even seemingly insignificant details) have been found to improve memory retrieval by encouraging more complete and accurate recall without leading questions.
What is a limitation of the cognitive interview in improving eyewitness testimony?
A limitation of the cognitive interview is that it can be time-consuming and requires significant training for police officers. Additionally, while it improves accuracy, it may also increase the number of incorrect or irrelevant details recalled, which could complicate the process of identifying the most important and accurate information.
What is a strength of the stress and anxiety research in understanding eyewitness testimony?
A strength of research into stress and anxiety (e.g., Yerkes-Dodson Law) is that it provides a nuanced understanding of how different levels of emotional arousal can impact memory. It suggests that moderate anxiety may improve focus and memory, while high levels of stress can impair memory, offering a more complex view than previous models which simply linked anxiety to memory impairment.
What is a limitation of the research on stress and anxiety in eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that findings on the effects of stress and anxiety on memory are inconsistent. Some studies (e.g., Yuille and Cutshall) have shown that eyewitnesses under high stress still provide accurate details, whereas other studies suggest that stress can impair memory. This variability makes it difficult to generalize about how stress affects eyewitness testimony in different situations.
What is a strength of the age factor in eyewitness testimony research?
A strength is that research has shown that younger and older adults are generally less accurate in eyewitness identification tasks, providing valuable insights for the legal system. Understanding these age-related differences can help improve the fairness of trials by considering the reliability of testimony from different age groups.
What is a limitation of the research on age and eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that research on the effect of age on eyewitness testimony often focuses on controlled laboratory tasks, which may not reflect real-life situations. Factors such as the emotional significance of an event, the length of time since the event, and other situational variables may also influence memory accuracy, limiting the applicability of age-related findings.
How does the concept of leading questions impact the reliability of eyewitness testimony?
The concept of leading questions (e.g., “Did you see the man with the red shirt?”) shows how subtle changes in question phrasing can influence an eyewitness’s recall. This highlights the potential for memory contamination, where a witness may inadvertently incorporate suggested details into their testimony, making it less reliable.
What is a limitation of the research on leading questions and eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that much of the research on leading questions is conducted in artificial laboratory settings, which may not reflect the real-life pressures faced by eyewitnesses. In actual criminal investigations, witnesses may be exposed to multiple sources of influence, such as media reports or police questioning, which complicates the impact of leading questions.
What is a strength of post-event discussion research in eyewitness testimony?
A strength is that research into post-event discussion (e.g., Gabbert et al., 2003) shows how talking to others after witnessing an event can influence the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. This is valuable in understanding the social dynamics of memory recall and highlights the potential risks of contamination during police investigations or media coverage.
What is a limitation of post-event discussion research in eyewitness testimony?
A limitation is that post-event discussion can sometimes be difficult to study in naturalistic settings, as participants may be aware they are being observed. Additionally, the artificial nature of laboratory studies may not fully capture the complexities of real-world post-event discussions, which can involve multiple factors like emotional biases or social pressure.
How do individual differences (e.g., personality, cognitive style) affect the reliability of eyewitness testimony?
Research has shown that individual differences, such as a person’s cognitive style or susceptibility to stress, can affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. For example, some people may be more prone to memory distortions, while others may be better able to focus on critical details, suggesting that not all eyewitnesses are equally reliable.
