Eyewitness Testimony Flashcards
Define Eyewitness Testimony
An account given by people of an event they have witnessed (usually a crime or accident).
Causes Of Inaccuracies
- Postevent discussion
- Anxiety
- Leading Questions
Define Eyewitness Testimony
The evidence given in court or in police investigations by someone who has witnessed a crime or an accident
Define Misleading Information
Information that brings you to a false conclusion
Define Leading Question
A question phrased in such a way as to promt a particular kind of answer
Define Post Event Discussion
Having a conversation before he eyewitness testimony that can lead to inaccuracies.
Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony : Aim
To see if misleading information could effect eyewitness testimonies
Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony : Methods
Asked a group of 45 students separated into 5 groups to watch a video of a car accident and asked how fast the cars were going”. Each group got a different word in the question from contacted, hit, bumped, collided, smashed. A week later the same people were asked, if they saw any broken glass (when there was non)
Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony : Results
Contacted produced the lowest speed of 31.8mph while smashed produced the highest of 40.8 mph
Participants who had “smashed” as their question answered to seeing broken glass more commonly than the other groups.
Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony : Conclusion
The verb implied further things associated with the speed of the vehicle making it more likely that glass would be present if the cars smashed.
Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony : A P F C
To see if misleading information could effect eyewitness testimonies
Asked a group of 45 students separated into 5 groups to watch a video of a car accident and asked how fast the cars were going”. Each group got a different word in the question from contacted, hit, bumped, collided, smashed. A week later the same people were asked, if they saw any broken glass (when there was non)
Contacted produced the lowest speed of 31.8mph while smashed produced the highest of 40.8 mph
Participants who had “smashed” as their question answered to seeing broken glass more commonly than the other groups.
The verb implied further things associated with the speed of the vehicle making it more likely that glass would be present if the cars smashed.
Methodological Issues with Loftus and Palmer - Eyewitness Testimony
+Lab based so it is controlled, so no outside factors can affect results
- Real life emotions aren’t reached as it was only a video and not in person, Lacks ecological validity
- Couldn’t generalise as it was only students
Ethical Issues with Loftus and Palmer Eyewitness Testimony
Traumatic memories can upset participants
Deception -> No lies?
Informed Consent -> Knew everything that will happen?
Protection from harm -> Physical and mentally stable when walking in and walking out?
Loftus and Zanni - Effects on leading questions Aim
To investigate the distortion of eyewitness memory by use of definitive/leading questions in interview procedure.
Loftus and Zanni - Effects on leading questions Method
Participants were shown a clip of a car accident. Some were asked “Did you see a broken headlight?” and others were asked “Did you see the broken headlight?” (the definitive.) There was no broken headlight in the film clip.
Loftus and Zanni - Effects on leading questions Results
17% of the participants asked the definitive question replied that they had seen the broken headlight, while only 7% of those asked the non-definitive question said that they had.
Loftus and Zanni - Effects on leading questions Conclusion
The use of definitive or leading questions in an interview can lead to the creation of false memories by the eyewitness - thus eyewitness testimony is subject to inaccuracy and its reliability can be questioned.
Loftus and Zanni -Effects on leading questions A P F C
To investigate the distortion of eyewitness memory by use of definitive/leading questions in interview procedure.
Participants were shown a clip of a car accident. Some were asked “Did you see a broken headlight?” and others were asked “Did you see the broken headlight?” (the definitive.) There was no broken headlight in the film clip.
17% of the participants asked the definitive question replied that they had seen the broken headlight, while only 7% of those asked the non-definitive question said that they had.
The use of definitive or leading questions in an interview can lead to the creation of false memories by the eyewitness - thus eyewitness testimony is subject to inaccuracy and its reliability can be questioned.
Evaluate Loftus and Palmer - Ecological Validity
One Limitiation of the research is that it lacked mundane realism / ecological valididty. Participants viewed video clips rather than being present at a real life accident. As the video clip does not have the same emotional impact as witnessing a real-life accident the participants would be less likeyl to pay attention and less motivated to be accurate in their judgement.
Evaluation Loftus and Palmer - Use Of Students
A Further problem with the study was the use of students as participants. Students are not representative of the general population in a number of ways. Importantly they may be less experienced drivers and therefore less confident in their abilitiy to estimate speeds. This may have influenced them to be more swayed by the verb in the question
Define Anxiety
Anxiety is a state of arousal, uneasiness or tension caused by apprehension/fear of danger or misfortune.
Psychologists tend to believe that small increase in anxiety may increase the accuracy of memory, but high levels have a negative effects on accuracy
Loftus Weapon Effect: Aim
To find if anxiety effects eyewitness testimony
Loftus Weapon Effect: Method
Exposed to one of two conditions:
1. Overheard a low key discussion in a lab about an equipment failure. A person them emerged from the laboratory holding a pen in grease covered hands.
2. Overheard a heated and hostile debate between people in the lab. After the sound of breaking glass and crashing chairs. A man came out of the lab holding a paper knife covered in blood.
Participants were then asked to recall the person from 50 photos..
Loftus Weapon Effect: Results
49% correctly recalled the confederate from 50 photos in the condition where the person emerged holding a pen in greasy hands.
33% correctly recalled the confederate from 50 photos when the person emerged holding a paper knife covered in blood.