Factors Affecting Accuracy Of EWT - Misleading Info Flashcards
Eyewitness Testimony (EWT)
The ability of people to remember the details of events like accidents + crimes
EWT accuracy can be affected by factors like anxiety + misleading information
Misleading Information
Incorrect info given to an EW usually after the event
Can be in form of: leading questions + post-event discussion between co-witnesses and/or other ppl
Leading Questions
A question that suggest a certain answer based on its phrasing
e.g. ‘Was the knife in his left hand?’ => leads person to think where the knife is
Post-event Discussion (PED)
Occurs when there is more than 1 witness to an event => may discuss w/ each other
May influence the accuracy of each witness’s recall of event
Research on Leading Questions
Procedure: Loftus + Palmer (1974) - 45 pps in 5 groups watched car collision then asked qs about it => critical q being ‘How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?’ - hit swapped for diff verbs
Findings: The mean estimated speed for ‘contacted was 31.8 mph while for ‘smashed’ was 40.5 mph
=> Shows leading qs biased the EW’s recall of event
Why do leading questions affect EWT?
Response-bias explanation suggest wording of qs has no effect on pps memories but how they answer qs
Loftus + Palmer 2nd experiment: supported substitution explanation - wording does change pps memories - those told ‘smashed’ were more likely to report broken glass than those who heard hit
Research on post-event discussion
Procedures: Gabbert et al (2003) - studied pps in pairs who each watched same crime from diff POV => e.. 1 pp could see title of book being carried while other didn’t
Both pps discussed what they saw before a test of recall
Findings: Found 71% of pps mistakenly recalled aspects of events they didn’t see in video whlie control w/ no discussion was 0% => evidence of memory conformity
Why does post-event discussion affect EWT?
Memory contamination: when co-witnesses discuss their EWT may become altered or distorted as they combine info from other w? thier own memories
Memory conformity: Gabbert et al concluded EW often go along w/ each other for social approval or thought others were right + they are wrong - memory is unchanged
Real World Application - AO3
Used in the criminal justice system
Inaccurate EWt has serious consequences - Loftus (1975) found leading qs can distort memory that officers have to carefully phrase their qs
- Psychologists are sometimes asked to act as witnesses in court trails + explain limits of EWT to juries => shows they can help improve legal proceedimgs to protect innocent people
COUNTERPOINT for real world application
Practical applications of EWT may affect research
- Loftus + Palmer’s pps watched film clips in lab - lot less stressful than witnessing a real event
- Foster et al (1994) point out EWs remember has important consequences in real world while pps reponses dont - less motivated to be accurate
=> Suggests researchers like Loftus are too pessimistic about effect of misleading info - may be more dependable than studies suggest
Evidence against substitution - AO3
LIMITATION - EWT is more accurate for some aspects of an event than others
Sutherland + Hayne (2001) - showed pps a clip + when asked misleading qs, their recall was more accurate for central details than peripheral ones
=> pps focused on this and these memories are more resistant to misleading qs => not predicted by explanation
Evidence Challenging Memory Conformity
LIMITATION: evidence that PED actually alters EWT
Procedure : Skagerburg + Wright (2008) - showed pps 2 versions of clips - Mugger with light or dark brown hair - and discussed in pairs (had seen diff versions)
Findings: didn’t report what they had seen or heard etc but had a ‘blend’ of the two ( common answer was ‘medium brown’ hair)
=> Suggests memory is distorted by contaminations instead of memory conformity
Demand Characteristics - AO3
Lab studies identified misleading info as a cause of inaccurate EWT - HOWEVER
Zaragoza + McCloskey (1989) - argue many answers given by pps in lab studies are due to wanting to be helpful + not let the researcher down
=> guessed when they are asked a q they don’t know the answer to
