Misleading information Flashcards
What are the 2 types of misleading information?
- Leading questions
- Post event discussion
What is the research into leading questions being misleading information?
- Loftus and Palmer study
- 150 American students from Washington State University were divided into 3 groups of 50
- All students watched a 1 minute video depicting a car accident and were then given a questionnaire to complete
- 1 group was asked “How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?”
- 1 group was asked “How fast were they going when hit?”
- The 3rd group wasn’t asked anything
- They returned 1 week later and were asked “Did you see any broken glass?”
- 52% said yes (questioned with ‘smashed’), 14% said yes (questioned with hit), 12% of control group said yes- there was no broken glass
If the point is:
A weakness of leading questions affecting the accuracy of eye witness testimony is that, typically, the research was conducted on students.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- This creates problems generalising to the target population because the experiment was only conducted on 1 age group.
Link- This means that the study is limited in how far it can be used to explain the effect of leading questions on the accuracy of eye witness testimony, as the findings cannot be generalised to everyone, so it may offer an incomplete explanation.
If the point is:
A strength of leading questions is that the research findings into its effects on the accuracy of eye witness testimony are strengthened by the fact that the research has led to useful practical applications for society.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- Research into leading questions has contributed to the development of the ‘enhanced cognitive interview’ used by the police. This helps to reduce errors made by eye witnesses by eliminating the use of leading questions, as well as allowing the witness to initially report everything without interruption. Kohnken et al reviewed 53 studies and found this interview procedure led to a 34% increase is correct information.
Link- This implies that the research has led to advantageous application within real life scenarios and in certain professions.
If the point is:
One strength of research into leading questions is that most research in this area is within well controlled lab experiments, giving the research high internal validity. This means that we have increased confidence that it isn’t the independent variable, nor any extraneous variables that is responsible for any changes in the dependant variable.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- For example, in the Loftus and Palmer experiment, the independent variable was the verb used, which affected and changed the dependent variable, which was how they answered. This means we can make statements about cause and effect.
Link- This means that the high levels of internal validity can lead to repeating the experiment to check the results for accuracy.
If the point is:
A weakness of the research used to investigate the effect of leading questions of eye witness testimony is that, because they’re often lab experiments, they can be seen as having low ecological validity.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- This is because they take place in an artificial and controlled setting that do not necessarily reflect real life behaviour, like giving an eye witness testimony. In 2 studies on leading questions, the participants watched a film of a car accident (this is not the same as seeing a car accident in real life).
Link- Therefore, it makes it difficult to generalise the findings of such studies to real life eyewitness testimony.
What are the 3 factors that can lead to post event discussion that could damage eyewitness testimony.
- Retroactive interference- when the recall of an old memory is affected by new material (e.g. pre trial publicity is now banned)
- Conformity: Normative social influence- change behaviour to fit in (change your account of the incident)
Conformity: Informational social influence- conform to be right (think that police are right)
Led to eyewitnesses not being allowed to discuss evidence and police interviewing you several times whilst recording each interview - Repeat interviews- relies on memory being reconstructive: every time you recall something it changes
What is the research evidence of post event discussion on accuracy of eye witness testimony?
- Gabbert et al
- 60 students from Aberdeen University and 60 older adults recruited from a local community
- Participants watched a video of a girl stealing money from a wallet and were tested individually (control group) or in pairs (co-witness group)
- Co-witness group were told they watched the same video, but had in fact seen different perspectives of the same crime and only 1 person actually witnessed the girl stealing
- Co-witness group discussed the crime together
- All participants then completed a questionnaire, testing their memory of the event
- 71% of co-witness group recalled information they had not actually seen
- 60% said the girl was guilty despite the fact they hadn’t seen her commit a crime
If the point is:
A strength of post event discussion is that it has led to useful practical applications which help society and the justice system.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- For example, knowing that witnesses may distort each others memories through post event discussion has benefitted the police when handling investigations. Now, when a crime occurs, they will separate the witnesses and interview them separately, advising them not to discuss the event with each other to reduce the risk of their memories becoming distorted.
Link- This suggests that research into the effects of post event discussion has had positive effects on society, helping to improve the way that witnesses are managed within criminal investigations.
If the point is:
A weakness of the research into post event discussion affecting the accuracy of eye witness testimony is that it may not take into account other factors that could affect the accuracy of eye witness testimony.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- For example, individual differences. It has been found that older people were less accurate than younger people at giving eye witness testimony. Also, all age groups are more accurate when identifying people of their own age. Research studies often use younger people to be identified and therefore some age groups may appear less accurate but in fact this is not true.
Link- This implies that individual differences may affect the results of research into post event discussion.
If the point is:
A weakness of the research evidence to support the role of post event discussion in affecting the accuracy of eye witness testimony is that this research suffers from low levels of ecological validity. This is because of the use of laboratory settings to study eye witness testimony.
What is the evidence and link?
Evidence- One methodological issue with the Gabbert et al study is that the video doesn’t reflect eye witnesses of a real crime, meaning it wasn’t as serious and therefore doesn’t matter if you get something wrong.
Link- This means that the research support for the effects of post event discussion on the accuracy of eye witness testimony may lack credibility.
What are the evaluation points for leading questions?
— Research is conducted on students
+ The research findings into its effects on the accuracy of EWT are strengthened by the fact the research has led to useful practical applications for society
+ Most research within this area is within well controlled lab experiments, giving the research high internal validity. This means that we have increased confidence that it is not the independent variable nor any extraneous variables that is responsible for any changes in the dependent variable
— Because the research is often lab experiments, they can be seen as having low ecological validity
What are the evaluation points for post event discussion?
+ Led to useful practical applications which help society and the justice system
— Research may not take into account other factors that could affect the accuracy of EWT
— Research suffers from low levels of ecological validity. This is because of the use of laboratory settings to study EWT
What are leading questions?
A question which suggests a certain answer because of the way it’s phrased
