Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Why We Remember & Forget > L9 - Eyewitness Testimony > Flashcards

L9 - Eyewitness Testimony Flashcards

1
Q

What does EWT stand for?

A

Eyewitness testimony

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

what is EWT?

A

Refers to an account of an event by witnesses. Legal term.

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

What are the 3 areas that problems can arise with EWT?

A
  • problem of perception - fail to perceive properly
  • problem of memory - remembering an event is a reconstructive process
  • problem of testimony - recalling an event is shaped by the person you are talking to
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the facts and figures on the use of EWT in trials in England and Wales, gathered by the Devlin Committee (1976)

A
  • 2000 lineups were held in the year that they analysed trials
  • 45% of these led to a suspect being picked out and, of these, 82% were convicted
  • 350 cases where EWT was the only real evidence of guilt. In these cases, 74% resulted in a conviction
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Name factors that can reduce the accuracy of EWT.

A

Eyewitnesses are subject to:

  • change blindness
  • prior expectations
  • pre/post- event information
  • overblown confidence
  • unconscious transference
  • verbal overshadowing
  • weapon focus
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is change blindness?

A

failure to notice apparently obvious changes in a scene

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

What is change blindness blindness?

A

The unduly optimistic belief that one is very rarely affected by change blindness

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

Simons and Levin (1998) did what to demonstrate change blindness?

A

Got an experimenter to talk to a subject as they were walking down the road, and had two construction workers walk in between them briefly, e.g. while holding a large door. The initial experimenter was swapped with a second stranger. 50% of PPS failed to notice the change in the person they were talking to.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What did Hastorf and Cantril (1954) study and find about how prior expectations can distort memory in a sample of American footballers?

A

American football game between Dartmouth and Princeton. Students of each college were asked to watch the game and record violations of rules by both teams. Princeton students recorded twice as many violations by Dartmouth players than Dartmouth players did.

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

What did Lindholm and Christianson (1998) study and find about how prior expectations can distort memory in a sample of Swedish and immigrants?

A

Swedish and immigrant students watched a simulated burglary in which the burglar was either a swede or an immigrant. Half of the simulations had a Swedish perp, half had an immigrant perp.

Both types of students picked an innocent immigrant from a lineup more often than an innocent swede from the lineup. Thought to result from the high involvement of immigrants in Swedish crime statistics, and the subsequent association of immigrants with crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Describe the effect of schemas on memory recall

A

Our memory for information that fits in with schemas is better than our memory for information that is incongruent with our schemas (Tuckey and Brewer, 2003)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How did Bartlett (1932) describe the influence of schemas on memory?

A

Schemas structure our world knowledge and influence memory storage and retrieval

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

What did Tuckey and Brewer (2003) find about the interpretation of ambiguous information and schemas?

A

Eyewitnesses generally interpreted ambiguous information as being consistent with their schemas (i.e. the robber being male)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What did Loftus and Palmer (1974) study and find about distorted memories and leading questions?

A

PPS watched a video of a car accident, and were subsequently asked how fast the car was going at the time of the incident. But different groups of PPS were asked in terms of the car having ‘collided’, ‘smashed into’, ‘bumped into’, ‘hit’, or ‘contacted’.

PPS gave the highest reported speed of the accident when the question was asked in terms of it having ‘smashed’, and the lowest having ‘contacted;.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What did Eakin, Schrieber and Sergent-Marshall (2003) show about retroactive interference and EWT?

A

Eyewitness memory can be impaired by misleading information provided after they have witnessed a video of the crime, even when they are warned of the presence of misleading information.

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

What did Lindsay et al., (2004) show about proactive interference and EWT?

A

Recall errors whilst reporting on a burglary were more frequent when the prior narrative was more similar to the actual event. Therefore, eyewitness’ previous experiences can shape what they later remember.

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

What does SMF stand for?

A

Source monitoring framework

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What is the SMF?

A

Explains how retroactive interference can disort memory. Determines whether the source of the information reported came from the actual event, or information heard after the event.

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

What is source misattribution?

A

The ability to remember information correctly, but being wrong about where the information came from.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What did Loftus (1979) find about memories for previous episodes being overwritten by new information presented afterwards?

A

Subjects watched a video of a pedestrian-car accident. Were subsequently asked a leading question about whether there was a stop sign or a give-way sign (were asked about the opposite of whichever version they saw).

70-85% chose the sign they were falsely led towards on a forced choice decision making task, even though they were explicitly paid extra to reduce demand characteristics in order to reach correct answers.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What could be the neural mechanism for the effect of retroactive interference on distortion of memories from misleading information?

A

When you reactivate a past memory, tis moved from a passive to active state to enable modification - perhaps this is when new, misleading information replaces the original, correct information about the event.

  • Perhaps, according to the standard model of systems consolidation, there could be less of an influence of misleading questions/information after more time has elapsed post-event. By this time, perhaps more of the memory trace has been solidified and consolidated in the neocortex, where it is less susceptible to interference?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What did Dodson and Kruger (2006) find about the effect of age on susceptibility to misleading information?

A

Older adults are more susceptible to misleading information than younger adults

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What is own age bias?

A

The accuracy of identifying someone is increased when the culprit is about as old as the witness. (perhaps people focus on features of other people, if they are more similar to themselves?)

(Wright and Stroud, 2002)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the relationship between age and confidence in false memories?

A

Elderly adults are likely to be more confident in their false memories.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What is the relationship between age and likelihood to choose a suspect from a lineup?

A

Older adults are more likely to choose someone from a lineup, even if the culprit isn’t present.

26
Q

What steps can be taken to reduce age biases?

A
  • Make sure older adults and children aren’t exposed to misleading information
  • Ask the elderly detailed questions to help them weed out any source misattributions.
27
Q

What is the paradoxical finding between confidence of a witness and trust from jurors?

A

More confident eyewitnesses are more likely to be believed by jurors. However, confidence ratings have no bearing on the accuracy of the EWT.

28
Q

Why might it be the case that confidence doesn’t predict accuracy of recalled information?

A
  • We have no reference point for the accuracy of eyewitness events
  • we have a good idea of whether our general knowledge is more or less accurate than others’.
29
Q

How does confirmatory feedback influence eyewitness confidence?

A

Confirming feedback has been shown to increase eyewitness’ confidence in their choice of suspect from a lineup more when they were incorrect than when they were correct (Bradfield, Wells and Olsen, 2002).

30
Q

What are the findings on the effect of anxiety and violence on EWT?

A

Memory for the central aspects of the incident are enhanced by the presence of violence.
Memory for the peripheral aspects of the incident are reduced by the presence of violence.

31
Q

How is the effect of anxiety and violence on EWT typically studied in the lab?

A

PPS are presented with a film which either has a violent or non-violent crucial incident.

32
Q

What is the weapon focus effect?

A

Attention is drawn towards a weapon, reducing the memory and encoding for peripheral information.

33
Q

What did Loftus (1979) find abut the accuracy of suspect identification when a weapon was present?

A

The presence of a weapon reduced the accuracy of suspect identification.

34
Q

Why might the weapon focus effect reduce memory for peripheral details?

A

Loftus, Loftus and Messo (1987) found that witnesses spend more time looking at a weapon or a non-weapon substitute. Could therefore be due to attention being naturally drawn to the weapon at the expense of other aspects of the situation.

35
Q

What did Pickel (2009) suggest about why the WFE might occur?

A

The weapon:

  • poses a threat
  • is unexpected
36
Q

What did Pickel (2009) study and find about reasons for the WFE, and its effect on ID accuracy?

A

Analysed situations of high/low threat (gun pointed at floor vs at woman) and high/low expectancy of a weapon (baseball field vs gun range)

Found that expectancy had an effect on ID accuracy and threat level did not,

37
Q

What did Deffenbacher et al.’s (2004) meta-analysis find about the influence of heightened anxiety and stress on EWT?

A
  • negatively impacted witness’ ID accuracy
  • reduced witness’ ability to remember:
    culprit details
    crime scene details
    actions of central characters
38
Q

What did Deffenbacher et al.’s (2004) meta-analysis find about the influence of heightened anxiety and stress on EWT?

A
  • negatively impacted witness’ ID accuracy
  • reduced witness’ ability to remember:
    culprit details
    crime scene details
    actions of central characters
39
Q

What is prosopagnosia?

A

Inability to recognise faces

40
Q

What did Bruce et al., (1999) study and find about poor recognition of faces by healthy individuals?

A

Showed a picture of a face and asked PPS to match it with one of 10 faces below it.

When the correct face was present, PPS were 65% accurate in identifying the correct face

When the correct face was not present, 35% of PPS still picked a face! Showing a video along with the picture did not improve performance

41
Q

What did Patterson and Baddeley (1977) find about the most effective processing of faces?

A

PPS were better at recognising faces that they had previously processed psychologically (in terms of the emotion the face was displaying) rather than faces they had processed physically (nose, eyes, chin, etc).

42
Q

What did Farah (1994) find about how we process faces?

A

We process faces holistically, without really paying attention to details.

We process objects with far more detail

43
Q

Which illusion supports the notion that we process faces holistically?

A

Thatcher illusion - local features are upside down, but the difference is not that striking to us because we process the face as a whole, rather than by its components

44
Q

What is the verbal overshadowing effect for faces?

A

Verbal description of a previously seen face impairs later recognition of that face

45
Q

What were Clare and Lewandowsky’s (2004) 3 findings about verbal descriptions and verbal overshadowing?

A
  • Providing a verbal report of the culprit makes eyewitnesses more reluctant to identify anyone in a lineup.
  • however, when forced to pick someone, this effect disappears
  • Brief verbal descriptions are more likely to produce a verbal overshadowing effect than detailed verbal descriptions
46
Q

What are the two explanations for why the cross-race effect can distort memory for faces?

A
  • Expertise hypothesis

- Socio-cognitive hypothesis

47
Q

How does the expertise hypothesis explain the cross race effect for distorting memory for faces?

A

THe prediction that we are better at recognising faces of the same race, because we have more exposure to facial features of those races.

48
Q

What is the evidence against the expertise hypothesis as an explanation for distorting memory for faces?

A

The effect disappears when PPS are instructed to pay attention to certain facial features of those with a different race.

49
Q

How does the socio-cognitive hypothesis explain the cross race effect for distorting memory for faces?

A

Thorough processing of faces only occurs for individuals with whom we identify with (our in-group)

50
Q

What did Shriver et al., (2008) find about socio-cognitive hypothesis?

A

PPS were white and educated. PPS rated white faces in wealthy contexts as in-group members. They rated white faces in impoverished contexts as out-groups. They also rated black faces, regardless of context, as out-groups.

PPS’ facial recognition was only good for in-group faces.

51
Q

What are the statistics of success for police lineups according to Valentine, Pickering and Darling (2003)?

A

Out of 314 real lineups:

  • 40% identified the suspect
  • 20% identified a non-suspect (innocent)
  • 40% failed to ID anyone
52
Q

How could you improve the reliability of police lineups?

A
  • sequential lineups (reduces mistaken IDs by 50%, and significantly reduces positive IDs)
  • warn witnesses that culprits may not be in the lineup at all (reduces mistaken ID’s by 42%, and only reduces positive ID’s by 2%)
53
Q

What are 3 techniques the police can use when conducting interviews, in order to get a more detailed, objective and valid account of incidents?

A
  • open ended questioning - what can you tell me about…?
  • Allowing the witness to finish and not interrupting
  • ask relevant follow up questions rather than following a set order of questioning
54
Q

What is the cognitive interview (Geiselman et al., 1985)

A

A more reliable way of interviewing witnesses based on the literature on how we encode and store information.

55
Q

What are the goals of the cognitive interview (CI) and what retrieval rules do they tap into?

A
  • To improve the match between encoding and retrieval contexts: mental reinstatement of context, and encouraging complete reporting, even of minute details.
  • Prompting access to multiple, different cues improves retrieval: attempting to describe the events in several different orders, and reporting the incident from different viewpoints.
56
Q

What are the two main strengths of the cognitive interview?

A
  • grounded in the literature

- elicits more information than standard interview techniques

57
Q

What are the weaknesses of the cognitive interview?

A
  • more information overall brings with it a higher amount of false information
  • it is more valuable for recalling peripheral rather than central details
58
Q

How does hypnosis compare to the CI and standard interview techniques, in terms of the number of correct statements that it elicits?

A

It elicits more correct statements than standard interviews, but also more false ones. This is due to the increased level of suggestibility it causes in PPS.

59
Q

Are lab studies relevant in the study of EWT? Why/why not?

A

No, because in lab studies, PPS:

  • know there will be little/no consequence for any wrong judgements or information.
  • feel less anxiety and stress
  • are limited to a single viewpoint, and cannot move around and interact with people within the scenario.
  • have less time to view the event and people

Further, the use of experts in EWT:

  • makes jurors more skeptical of the EWT
  • reduces the instance of guilty verdicts, regardless of the strength of the case.
  • therefore, even in strong cases, experts are reducing the likelihood of a guilty verdict even when there ought to be one.
60
Q

Why might laboratory research add value to hearings and jurors where EWT is present?

A
  • watching a videotaped version of events yields more information (than live experiences), of both robber and weapon characteristics. Therefore, memory distortions in the lab are underestimates of real life memory deficiencies.
  • Jurors who hear expert testimony make more accurate decisions than those who have not (Cutler & Penrod, 1995).
  • Experts only discuss EWT findings that are agreed to be well established
  • The presentation of expert advice levels the playing field between the witness’ testimony and the suspects view, which assists jurors.
61
Q

Describe Cutler, Penrod and Dexter’s (1989) study supporting EWT.

A

Mock jurors watched a realistic videotaped trial of an armed robbery. A witness made an ID of a suspect under good conditions (robber not wearing a disguise, weapon hidden from view, ID took place 2 days after & lineup instructions not suggestive) or bad conditions (disguise worn, weapon exposed, ID 14 days after & suggestive instructions)

62
Q

What did Cutler, Penrod and Dexter (1989) find that supported the use of EWT in court?

A

Expert testimony led jurors to better weigh the quality of ID conditions

Jurors not exposed to EWT/expert testimony were largely insensitive to the quality of witnessing and ID conditions.

Why We Remember & Forget (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions