Factors affecting EWT: Misleading Information

Question 1

What are leading questions?

Answer 1

A question that suggests a desired answer by the way it is phrased
- E.g. “Was the knife in the accused’ left hand?” implies the answer is “left hand”

Question 2

What is post-event discussion?

Answer 2

A conversation between co-witnesses or an interviewer and an eyewitness after a crime has taken place which may contaminate a witness’ memory of the event
- The memory can be altered or contaminated if there are numerous questions asked many times or if the event is discussed many times

Question 3

Outline research into the effect of misleading information on EWT (leading questions)

Answer 3

• Loftus and Palmer
• Leading questions
• Aim: To investigate the effect of leading questions on eyewitness testimony
• Method: Lab experiment, independent groups, 45 male American students, IV=verb used, DV=estimated speed of car
• Procedure: Five conditions where a different verb was used to describe a car crash seen in a video: “How fast were the cars travelling when they hit/smashed/collided/bumped/contacted each other?”
• Results: Mean estimated speed: “Smashed” = 40.8mph
  “Contacted” = 31.8mph
• Conclusion: Leading questions affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony

Question 4

What is a strength of Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Answer 4

1.) High internal validity: nuisance variables controlled for in lab experiment (e.g. fatigue affect participants’ attention so the leading question would otherwise not be the only affecting factor; if the volume of the clip was loud their estimate may be higher), this means we can confidently say the IV (leading question via the verb used) directly impacted the DV (mean estimated speed)

Question 5

What are two limitations of Loftus and Palmer’s study?

Answer 5

1.) Unrepresentative: sample only included male American students so we can only say that male American’s are applicable to the results found (i.e. leading questions affect EWT) therefore the study lacks population validity and we do not know if leading questions affect everybody (non-Americans) in the same way

2.) Lacks external validity: conducted as lab experiment, artificial environment not reflective of real life, lacks ecological validity and tells us little about the effects of leading questions in real life settings and more research is required

Question 6

Outline research into the effect of misleading information on EWT (post-event discussion)

Answer 6

• Gabbert
• Conformity effect
• Participants were put into pairs where each partner would watch a different video
• In one condition pairs were told to discuss what they had seen with one another, before recall
• 71% of those who had discussed the event went on to mistakenly recall items
• LaRooy
• Repeat interviewing
• Comments from interviewer may become incorporated in witnesses’ recollection of events (leading questions may also alter recall)
• This is especially the case for children

Question 7

What is one strength supporting misleading information as a factor affecting EWT?

Answer 7

1.) Real world application: findings from research into misleading info have been used to warn the justice system of problems with eyewitness testimonies, recent DNA exoneration cases (being absolved from the guilty charge) show that mistaken eyewitness identification was the second largest factor that led to wrongful convictions therefore eyewitness testimonies are relied upon too heavily and cannot be used alone to convict people of crimes

Question 8

What are two limitations about misleading information as a factor affecting EWT?

Answer 8

1.) Individual differences: some are influenced by leading questions more than others, Anastasi and Rhodes found that people in the age range between 18 to 45 were more accurate than 55 to 78, own age bias = people more accurate identifying those of their own age group, younger or older age groups may seem less accurate therefore we cannot solely rely on one person’s account

2.) Conflicting research: Foster found that when participants thought they were watching a real-life robbery their identification of the robber was more accurate as they thought their response would influence the trial, this means other factors (stress, motivation) may mitigate the effects of leading questions, therefore leading questions may have less of an impact in real life settings (i.e. real eyewitness testimonies)