memory: factors effecting eyewitness testimony -> misleading information

Question 1

What does eyewitness testimony mean?

Answer 1

The ability to remember the details of events, such as accidents and crimes

Question 2

How do leading questions effect eyewitness testimony?

Answer 2

The wording of the question may lead (or mislead) you to give a certain answer

Question 3

What are the two ways leading questions can lead to inaccurate EWT?

Answer 3

• substitution explanation
• response-bias explanation

Question 4

What does the response-bias explanation suggest?

Answer 4

The wording of the question has no real effect on the participants’ memories, but just effects how they decide to answer
- an emotional pressure to give a particular response

Question 5

What does substitution explanation suggest?

Answer 5

The wording of a leading question changes the participants’ memory

Question 6

Who did research into leading questions?

Answer 6

Loftus and Palmer (1974)

Question 7

Outline the procedure of research into leading questions:

Answer 7

• 45 American students formed an opportunity sample.
• This was a laboratory experiment with five conditions, only one of which was experienced by each participant (an independent measures design).
• They watched film clips of car accidents and then asked them questions about the accident
• They were asked the leading question of how fast the cars were going when they hit/smashed/collided/bumped/contacted each other

Question 8

What were the findings of the research into leading questions?

Answer 8

• The estimated speed was affected by the verb used.
• The verb contacted resulted in a mean estimated speed of 31.8 mph compared to 40.5 mph for the verb smashed
• The verb implied information about the speed, which systematically affected the participants’ memory of the accident
• suggests the leading question biased the eyewitnesses’ recall of an event

Question 9

Who did research into the substitution explanation?

Answer 9

Loftus and Palmer (1974) conducted a second experiment that supported the substitution explanation

Question 10

What did research into the substitution explanation find?

Answer 10

The wording of a leading question changes the participants’ memory of the film clip
- shown because pps who originally heard ‘smashed’ were later more likely to report seeing broken glass than those who heard hit

Question 11

What can be concluded from research into substitution explanation?

Answer 11

• the critical verb altered their memory of the accident
• the effects of misleading information in the form of leading questions can be long lasting and actually changes memories via substitution rather than response bias

Question 12

What is post-event discussion?

Answer 12

When witnesses discuss what they have seen with co-witnesses or other people, influencing the accuracy of each witnesses’ recall of an event

Question 13

Who did research into post-event discussion?

Answer 13

Gabbert et. al (2003)

Question 14

Outline the procedure of research into post-event discussion:

Answer 14

• Videos of crimes shot from different perspectives were shown to pairs of participants
• This meant that each participant could see elements in the event that the other could not
• Pps in the cowitness group discussed the crime together and all pps completed a questionnaire, testing their memory of the event

Question 15

What were the findings of research into post-event discussion?

Answer 15

• Researchers found that 71% of pps mistakenly recalled aspects of the event they picked up in discussion and didn’t see in the video
• The corresponding figure in a control group where there was no discussion was 0%

Question 16

What were the conclusions of research into post-event discussion?

Answer 16

• This was evidence of memory conformity as it may be an attempt to gain social approval
• highlights the effects of PED and the powerful effect is has on the accuracy of EWT
• suggests that witnesses will change their account of crimes to match other witness’ testimony

Question 17

What are two explanations for why PED affects EWT?

Answer 17

• memory contamination
• memory conformity

Question 18

What is memory contamination?

Answer 18

When co-witnesses discuss a crime together, their eyewitness testimonies may become altered or distorted
- because they combine misinformation from other witnesses with their own memories

Question 19

What is memory conformity?

Answer 19

When witnesses go along with each other either to gain social approval or because they believe the others are correct

Question 20

Evaluation: Real-world application -> strength

Answer 20

• important practical uses in the criminal justice system
• the consequences of inaccurate EWT can be very serious
• Loftus (1975) believes that leading questions can have such a distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be very careful when phrasing their questions in interviewing eyewitnesses
• research into EWT is one area in which psychologists believe they can make a positive difference to the lives of real people such as improving the justice system

Question 21

Counterpoint: Low validity of EWT

Answer 21

• Limitation of Loftus and Palmer’s study is that their pps watched film clips of car accidents
• very different experience from witnessing a real accident, mainly because such clips lack the stress of a real accident
• lacks mundane realism, as the video clip does not have the same emotional impact as witnessing a real-life accident
• the research lacks ecological validity

Question 22

Evaluation: Demand characteristics -> limitation

Answer 22

• Zaragoza and McCloskey (1989) argue that many answers given by pps in lab studies are due to demand characteristics
• Participants usually do not want to let the researcher down and want to appear helpful and attentive
• when they are asked a question they don’t know the answer to, they guess, especially if it is a yes/no question
• therefore, demand characteristics are a problem for studies of EWT e.g. Loftus and Palmer because it limits validity and makes the test less reliable

Question 23

Evaluation: evidence challenging memory conformity

Answer 23

• There is evidence the PED actually alters EWT
• Skagerberg and Wright (2008) showed their pps film clips
• there were two versions
• Pps discussed the clips in pairs, each having seen different versions
• They often did not report what they had seen in the clips or what they had heard from the co-witness, but a ‘blend’ of the two
• suggests that the memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion rather than the result of memory conformity