key question - post event info CRIMINAL

Question 1

key question

Answer 1

are EWT too unreliable to trust?

Question 1

intro

Answer 1

• definition of EWT, information provided by a witness soley based on their memory, info based on crime scene, order of events, description of criminal
  devlin report- 350 cases 70% soley convicted due to EWT
  innocment project overturned over 70% EWT cases using DNA testing
• demonstatres importance of not just using EWT as can lead to wrongful convictions

Question 2

A01.1 misinformation effect

Answer 2

original info and new info get merged together, more likely to recall new information easiest to retreieve more recent. use new infro to fill in gaps, may have never even encoded original event

Question 3

A03.1

Answer 3

strength- support case study ronald cotton and how police gave jenifer thompson new information - post information making her feel more confident about decision and in second stage due to confimation in first stage led to her chooosing ronald cotton incorrectly and prision 11 years- expand

strength- loftus bugs bunny, found that when ppts were exposed to false information about meeting buggs bunny in dysneyland- later recalled in detail event even though didnt occur - link and expand

Question 4

A01.2 reconstructive memory

Answer 4

• schemas are packages of information based on past experiences and new information, post event information can be added to out schemas so when we try to remember we reconstruct with the new informartion as part of our schemas- false recallation. often ignore info that isnt compattable with schemas
• confabulation, use schemas fill in gaps when cant completely remember
• rationalisation, change info to what makes more sense according to schemas
• simplification, shorten what happened remeber gist not complete details

Question 5

A03.2

Answer 5

BARTLETT, asked a group of european students to recall native american story told to them, found number of features RM theory included in recallation
- confabulation, made up ideas based on their schemas and culture e.g. changed hunting seals to fishing
missing out information which was unfamiliar/ irrelevant e.g. ghosts didnt aline with schemas/ culture
rationalised story to make more sense according to schemas
simplified story
link to EWT

• weakness of bartlett- lacks controls
• weakness doesnt explain flash bulb memorys brown

Question 6

A01.3 leading questions

Answer 6

wording of questions imply ehats happened or the view of whats happened which may change original memory

Question 7

A03.3

Answer 7

loftus and palmer- expand and link to EWT, 34mph , 40.8 smashed
0.32 broken glass

weakness of loftus and palmer lacks eco val- lab study or gen

could talk about loftus and zanni supporting - headlights

weakness- yuille and cutshall - ribbery and shooting in vancoover 5 months later witnesses could still recall event perfectly matching origi=inal police information, misleading questions didnt effect memeory recall, if memory is meaningful and perosnal recall is better

Question 8

applications

Answer 8

cognitive interview no post event info, leadinf questions etc- misidentificuation- innocent project