memory-Eyewitness testimonies

Question 1

evaluate palmer and lofter research

Answer 1

Reliability-its reliable as the study used the same video clips and asked the same critical questions of “how fast the car was going when it hit the other car” this allows for the study to be replicated and reliability to be assessed
application-it has practical applications the police are now trained to not ask leading questions. This information is useful to police officers
validity-lacks external validity as its an artificial task as its a lab experiment so its not true to real life as you don’t watch videos of car crashes in real life
ethics-there is no protection of harm as watching videos of car crashes may be distressing however she fully debriefed them at the end.
He gave them no informed consent (as he lied about the aim) however if they knew the aim they could display demand characteristics

Question 2

what are the 3 factors affecting the accuracy of eye witness testimony

Answer 2

-leading questions
-post-event discussion
-anxiety

Question 3

what is a leading question

Answer 3

a question by its form or content suggests to the witness what the answer is and leads them to the desired answer

Question 4

who had evidence to suggest that leading questions impact EWT

Answer 4

loftus and palmer

Question 5

Loftus and palmers experiment one

Answer 5

-They split 45 university students in 5 groups of 9
-they showed them 7 road traffic accident clips
-they then asked the the critical question of how fast the cars were going when they hit each other
-when the verb was more intensive eg-smashed the mph was estimated to be higher at 40.8 however when it was changed to a less intensive verb eg-hit the mph was estimated to be lower at 34 mph

Question 6

what was palmer and Loftus experiment 2

Answer 6

-they had 150 university participants split into 3 groups
-they showed them a 1 min clip on multiple car accidents
-they asked them how fast the car was going when they hit each other
-the comparison groups verb was changed to smashed
-they then returned a week later and asked them “did you see any broken glass”
-16 participants who saw the critical verb “smashed” said they saw broken glass as appose to the 7 participants who saw the verb “hit” and said they didn’t see broken glass

Question 7

what is the addition of false details to memory

Answer 7

confabulation

Question 8

what is the reconstructive hypothesis

Answer 8

this is when a person obtains two kinds of information about an event
the first is obtained from percieving the event itself
the second it aquired after the event eg-through post event disussion
these two sources become intergrated as one memory and can lead to memory distortion

Question 9

evaluate palmer and lofter research

Answer 9

Reliability-its reliable as the study used the same video clips and asked the same critical questions of “how fast the car was going when it hit the other car” this allows for the study to be replicated and reliability to be assessed
application-it has practical applications the police are now trained to not ask leading questions. This information is useful to police officers
validity-lacks external validity as its an artificial task as its a lab experiment so its not true to real life as you don’t watch videos of car crashes in real life
ethics-there is no protection of harm as watching videos of car crashes may be distressing however she fully debriefed them at the end.
He gave them no informed consent (as he lied about the aim) however if they knew the aim they could display demand characteristics

Question 10

who were the two people that found apposing evidence for EWT

Answer 10

foster et al
yuille and cutshall

Question 11

what did foster et al find

Answer 11

he asked particpents to watch a video of an armed robbery. He than asked particpents to identify the robber from the identity paracde. The first group of particpents believed this was real and there answers would influence the trial. The seocnd group believed that this was a simulation. He found accurate identification of the robber was greater in group one
this shows lofter and palmers experiment lacked ecological validity

Question 12

what did Yuille and Cutshall find

Answer 12

witnesses to an armed robbery in Canada gave accurate reports on the crime 4 months later despite being given 2 leading questions. This suggest misleading information may have less effect on real-life EWT

Question 13

who had evidence to suggest post event discussion impacts EWT

Answer 13

gabbert et al

Question 14

what did Gabbert et al find

Answer 14

participants watched a video of a girl stealing money from a wallet. They were tested individually or in pairs. They were told in the co-witness group that they had seen the same video. However they had seen it from different perspectives and only one saw the girl stealing. In the co-witness group they discussed the crime. They then completed a questionnaire testing there memory of the events
they found 71% of participants who discussed events went on to mistakenly recall items acquired during the discussion compared to 0% in the control condition.

Question 15

what do gabbert et al findings suggest

Answer 15

that memories are impacted by post-event discussion through memory conformity or memory contamination

Question 16

what is memory confomity

Answer 16

where witnesses may go along with others for social approval or because they believe others to be right

Question 17

what is memory contamination

Answer 17

when memories become altered as they combine other witnesses memories with their own

Question 18

evaluate gabberts study

Question 19

who found the largest single conviction contributing to wrongful conviction was EWT

Answer 19

wells and Olson found the largest single factor contributing to wrongful conviction was EWT

Question 20

what other evidence may be more objective

Answer 20

CCTV
forensic evidence

Question 21

who found anxiety reduces recall

Answer 21

johnson and scott
Loftus and burns

Question 22

what did johnson and scott do

Answer 22

condition one(weapon condition)-they heard a heated argument in the room next door. A crash of equipment and then a man emerged holding a paper knife.
condition 2(no weapon conditon)- There was a disagreement about lab equipment then a man left holding a pen

Question 23

what did johnson and scott find

Answer 23

in the no weapon condition they accurately recalled the face 49% of the time whereas in the weapon condition they accurately recalled 33%
this is known as the weapon focus phenomenon as they are focussed on the weapon rather than the mans face.

Question 24

evauluation of johnson and scotts study

Question 25

what did Loftus and burns find

Answer 25

they found participants who watched a violent crime of a boy being shot in the face had less accurate recall about information about the crime than a group who watched a non-violent crime

Question 26

who found anxiety improves recall

Answer 26

yuille and cutshall
christianson and hubinette

Question 27

what did Yuille and Cutshall find

Answer 27

he interviewed 13 witnesses to a crime where the store owner was wounded and the thief was shot dead. Witnesses were interviewed 4-5 months later these were compared with the original police interviews at the time of the shooting.
Accuracy was determined by the number of details in each event.
those who were most distressed gave a 88% accurate recall as appose to the 75% who said they were less distressed

Question 28

what is a limitation of yuille and cutshalls experiment

Answer 28

there was a lack of control over confounding variables as those who were closest to the event experienced the highest levels of stress which may have helped there recall

Question 29

what is yerkes dodson law

Answer 29

that we need a little bit of anxiety to ensure we perform at out optimum rate
-too much or to little anxiety will lead to poor recall