Memory: Eye Witness Testimony - Misleading Information

Question 1

What Is Eye Witness Testimony?

Answer 1

• The evidence given in court in court or police investigation, by someone who witnessed a crime or accident.

Question 2

What Is Misleading Information?

Answer 2

• Incorrect information given to an eyewitness following an event.
• It gives them the wrong impression.
• This can be during post-event discussion or take the form of leading question.

Question 3

What Is A Leading Question?

Answer 3

• A question which because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer.

Question 4

What Is Post-Event Discussion?

Answer 4

• Occurs when there is more than one witness to an event.
• Witness may discuss what they have seen with co-witness or with other people. Repeating interviews also create a form of this.
• It may influence the accuracy of each witnesses’ recall the event.

Question 5

Weakness: Loftus And Palmer Evaluation - Lacked Realism

Answer 5

• Loftus and Palmer’s research lacked mundane realism.
• The task involved watching a car crash. Participants probably guessed that they were going to be asked questions about the video.
• In everyday life you do not know you are going to be witness so you may not be aware of what is going on. Also the emotion being present during a car crash will not be there when watching a video.
• This reduces the validity of the supporting evidence.

Question 6

Strength: Loftus And Palmer Evaluation - High Control/ Lab Experiment

Answer 6

• Loftus and Palmer’s experiment have high control as it was a lab experiment.
• This meant that there was control of extraneous variables, so we know that the only thing impacting the DV was the IV.
• This means that the verb in a question impacts the rating of the speed and the memory of glass.
• Therefore, the results have greater internal validity as the DV and IV are controlled.

Question 7

Strength: Gabbert Et Al Evaluation - Increase Population Validity

Answer 7

• Gabbert’s research has increased population validity.
• The study used two different populations, students and older adults.
• The results between the two groups were similar.
• This suggests that people of all ages are equally impacted by post-event discussions.
• The results have greater external validity as it can be applied to more people.

Question 8

Weakness: Information Evaluation - Low External Validity

Answer 8

• Lab experiments may have low external validity.
• Zaragoss and McCloskey argue that many answers participants gave in studies of EWT as the result of demand characteristics. They think they have guessed the aim of the study.
• This may mean that they are more susceptible to leading questions in a study.
• However, an eyewitness in court may anticipate being subject to leading arguments as legal teams try to ‘paint’ guilt or innocence so they may have been more able to avoid being misled.

Question 9

Weakness: Misleading Information - Artificial Tasks

Answer 9

• Research into misled information uses artificial tasks.
• For example, Loftus and Palmer got participants to watch a video of a car crash.
• This is a very different experience from witnessing a real accident, which reduces the external validity of the findings.
• This means this research into this may tell us very little how leading questions impact eyewitness testimony in cases of real crime or accidents.