Eyewitnesses Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Stages of Memory

A
  • Preparation/ Attention Stage: See features or individual
  • Encoding Stage: Take note of certain features
  • Short-term Memory: Less detail from original encoding
  • Long-term memory: similar information but not all able to be retrieved
  • Retrieval Stage: Able to recall aspects of memory
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What factors can affect how much is encoded in an eyewitness

A

Inattention and Unexpectedness
- Did they expect something to happen

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

How can memories change in recall

A
  • Order of events may change
  • may embellish certain details
  • Fill in gaps that were forgotten
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What differences in interviewing techniques can affect the retrieval stage of memory

A
  • Wording of questions
  • Another witness recalling memories that you then believe as your own
  • Time elapsed since witnessing crime
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Types of retrieval

A
  1. Recall Memory: Reporting details of a witnessed event (free recall or questions)
  2. Recognition Memory: Reporting whether what is currently being viewed/heard is the same as the previously seen person/item of interest (is this something you have seen or heard before)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Eyewitness Research: Independent Variables

A

ESTIMATOR VARIABLES: Present at the time of the crime
- Cannot be changed in field, can be controlled in lab studies
- Eg: Age of witness, lighting, presence of a weapon, intoxication
SYSTEM VARIABLES: Can be manipulated to increase or decrease eyewitness accuracy
- Can be changed, under the control of the justice system to change
- Ex: Structure of interview, type of lineup procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Eyewitness Research: Dependent Variables

A

OPEN-ENDED RECALL AND/OR DIRECT QUESTION RECALL
- Recall of crime/event or Recall of perpetrator
- Can be verbal or written
- Analyzed by amount of info, type of info and accuracy of info
RECOGNITION OF PERPETRATOR

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Issues with current Interview Techniques

A
  • Officers commonly interrupt witnesses (switches line of thinking)
  • Officers ask short, specific questions (Focuses on one piece instead of full picture, easier to remember whole picture)
  • Asks questions in a random order (lack of temporality impacts ability to recall)
  • Contamination of co-witnesses can occur
  • Ask leading or suggestive questions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Memory Conformity

A

What one witness reports influences what the other witness reports

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Loftus & Palmer: Car accident study

A
  • Participants watched a video of a car accident
  • Asked “How fast were the cars going when they _____ each other” filling in the blank with smashed, bumped, collided, contacted
  • Faster speeds were reported when smashed was used
  • Slower speeds reported when bumped or contacted was used
  • Brought back to ask if glass was broken and those who had the word smashed were more likely to say yes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Loftus: Demonstrators disrupting class

A
  • 3 minute video of 8 demonstrators disrupting a class
  • Half of the participants were asked “was the leader of the 12 demonstrators male”
  • other half: “was the leader of the 4 demonstrators male”
  • One week later: “how many demonstrators were there?”
  • First half: average 8.85, second half: avg 6.4
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is the Misinformation Effect

A

Witness presented with inaccurate information after an event will incorporate that misinformation into subsequent recall

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are the hypothesis for the misinformation effect

A
  • Misinformation Acceptance Hypothesis: Witnesses guess at the answer they think the experimenter wants
  • Source Misattribution Hypothesis: Accurate and inaccurate memories both recall - however, witnesses do not remember where each came form
  • Memory Impairment Hypothesis: Original memory is replaced or altered, original memory is no longer accessible
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Standard Cognitive Interview

A
  • Only conducted on witnesses, they must be willing
    REINSTATING THE CONTEXT
  • Put back in situation, what senses are present
    REPORTING EVERYTHING
  • Free recall from beginning to end
  • Can add questions if in temporal order and context
    REVERSING ORDER
  • End-beginning
  • Allows catching of additional details
    CHANGING PERSPECITVE
  • What might someone else in the room have witnessed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Enhanced Cognitive Interview

A

Same steps with focus on;
- Rapport Building
- Supportive interviewer behaviour ( don’t interrupt, accept pauses, express attention)
- Transfer of control (let witness lead conversation)
- Focused Retrieval (open-ended questions)
- Witness-Compatibility Questioning (match thinking of witness, same subject)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Why is the enhanced cognitive interview not always used?

A

Takes time and a specific space
- Ideal but not necessary

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What have studies found on describing perpetrators?

A
  • Hair and clothing are most common descriptors
  • In staged crimes (know its going to happen) avg 7.35 descriptors
  • In real crimes (physiological arousal causes decrease in attention) avg 3.94
  • Writing out worse than verbal description
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What type of descriptors are accurate vs inaccurate?

A

Gender and race most accurate
ACCURATE
- Hair color
- Hair length
- Age
- Height
- Complexion
- Type of top
INACCURATE
- Weight
- Eye color
- Color of Footwear

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Featural vs configural recognition

A
  • Featural for object
  • Configural for faces
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Line ups

A
  • Provide evidence that the suspect is the perpetrator
  • Made up of foils and suspect
  • If suspect is selected it provides evidence against person
  • Default values: sex, race, maybe hair color
21
Q

Similarity-to-suspect strategy

A

Matches lineup members to suspect’s appearance
- Hair color, eye color, height, weight
- Too similar makes it hard to pick out

22
Q

Match-to-description Strategy

A

Distractors have features that were described in initial description

23
Q

Fair Lineup

A

Suspect does not stand out from distractors

24
Q

Assessing Lineup Accuracy

A
  • Correct identification: identify target when present
  • False Rejection: Identify no target when target is present
  • Foil identification: Identify a foil
  • Correct rejection: Identify no target when perpetrator isn’t present
  • False Identification: identify target when perpetrator isn’t present
25
Q

Foil Identification

A
  • Can happen with either target-present or target-absent
  • Known to police - the incorrect person will not be prosecuted
  • Raises questions about the credible
26
Q

False Rejection

A
  • May result in guilty suspect going free
  • Decreases evidence and likelihood of prosecution
27
Q

False Identification

A

Innocent suspect could be prosecuted
- most serious type of identification error
- Increases chance of innocent being prosecuted

28
Q

Simultaneous Lineup

A

All lineup members presented at the same time resulting in relative judgement
- One who looks MOST like perpetrator picked
- Mostly issue for target absent

29
Q

Relative Judgement

A

Members are compared to one another

30
Q

Sequential Lineup

A

Lineup members presented serially to witness resulting in absolute judgement
- Witness decides to move on
- Can’t move backwards
- Don’t know how many options

31
Q

Absolute Judgement

A

Members are compared to the witness’ memory of the perpetrator

32
Q

Lindsay & wells: Lineup identification

A
  • University students watched video-taped theft
  • Asked to identify perpetrator from 6 photos
    INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
  • Target: absent or present
  • Procedure: simultaneous or sequential
    RESUTLS
  • Sequential and simultaneous even with correct identification
  • Greater rate of correct rejection when sequential is used (used in ON)
  • Results replicated in real life
33
Q

Does order of suspect in line up matter

A
  • Studies have shown we look left first
  • Foils on left more likely to be chosen
  • Should randomize order
34
Q

Alternative forms of lineups

A
  • Photo arrays: quick, portable, static, less anxiety for witness, don’t have to worry about behaviour
  • Video-recorded lineups: can view behaviour, can pause + zoom, see gait, still quick and portable, can edit out bad behaviour
  • Show up: only one suspect is presented to the witness
  • Walk-by: naturalistic, police bring witness to where suspect is likely to be, anxiety for witness, time consuming
35
Q

Biased Lineup

A

The person the police suspect is obvious in some way
- May cause witness to feel pressured to pick that individual

36
Q

Foil Bias

A

Suspect is the only lineup member who matches initial description

37
Q

Clothing Bias

A

Suspect is the only lineup member wearing clothing similar to perp

38
Q

Instruction Bias

A

Police fail to mention that suspect may not be present

39
Q

Ways to decrease line up biase

A
  • use multiple types of line ups
  • clothing and face identification increase chance of correct suspect
40
Q

Estimator Variable: Age

A

Older adults less likely to make correct identification and correct rejection when compared to younger adults

41
Q

Estimator Variable: Race

A

Subject to cross race effect

42
Q

Cross-race effect

A

Witnesses remember faces of people of their own race with greater accuracy than they remember faces of people of other races

43
Q

Hypothesis that explain the Cross-Race effect

A

ATTITUDES (not true)
- People who are less prejudiced are better at distinguishing between faces among races
PHYSIOLOGICAL HOMOGENITY (No research to support)
- Some races have less variability in their faces
- All races have same heterogeneity
INTERRACIAL CONTACT
- The more contact you have with other races the better you will be able to identify them
- Exposure at young age important

44
Q

Estimator Variable: Weapon Focus

A
  • When a weapon is involved, witness’ attention tend to focus on the weapon rather than the perpetrator
  • Affects memory for the crime and the perpetrator’s appearance
  • explained by cue-utilization hypothesis or theory that weapons are unusual and attract witness’ attention (neither backed by research)
45
Q

Cue-Utilization Hypothesis

A

Good Theoretical Explanation - limited support
- when emotional arousal increases, attention capacity decreases (more focused on calming and emotional regulation)

46
Q

Pickel: Is weapon focus due to unusualness?

A

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- Setting
- Threat
DEPENDENT VARIABLES
- Memory for the perp’s appearance
RESULTS
- Threat played no roll
- Higher attention to weapon when object is unusual to location

47
Q

Fawcett et al: Expectation vs type of object attention to detail

A

Accuracy at recalling is highest when the object is expected
- higher with unexpected object than unexpected weapon

48
Q

Carlson and Carlson: Will some other sort of unusualness offset weapon focus

A

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- Method of aggression: fists, beer bottle, gun
- Facial Distinctiveness: Sticker on perp’s face vs no sticker
DEPENDENT VARIABLE
- Accuracy of memory for perpetrator
RESULTS
- When no sticker: worse accuracy when gun was present
- When sticker present: better accuracy than usual when gun is involved (not total effect)