Misleading information

Question 1

Key study?

Answer 1

Loftus and Palmer 1974

Question 2

Procedures of experiment 1?

Answer 2

• 45 students
• 7 films of different traffic accidents
• questionnaire asked to describe accident
• critical question: how fast were the cars going when they hit?
• other four groups were given “smashed”, “collided”, “bumped”, “contacted”

Question 3

Findings?

Answer 3

Participants gave different responses depending on verb used
E.g. “smashed” = mean estimate speed of 40.8
“Contacted” = 31.8

Question 4

Procedures of experiment 2?

Answer 4

• new participants
• 3 groups
• shown 1min long film of car accident
• participants returned 1 week later
• 10 questions about accident
• critical question: did you see any broken glass?
• no broken glass in film

Question 5

Findings?

Answer 5

Those who believed the car was travelling faster were more likely to think there would be broken glass
Leading question changed the actual memory a participant had for the event.

Question 6

Post event discussion: what is the conformity effect?

Answer 6

Co-witnesses may reach a consensus view of what actually happened - contamination of memory
Gabbert et al 2003 investigation: 71% of witnesses who had discussed the event with one another went on to mistakenly recall items acquired during the discussion

Question 7

Post-event discussion: what is repeat interviewing?

Answer 7

Possibility that comments from the interviewer will become incorporated into their recollection of events
LaRooy et al 2005: especially the case when children are interviewed about a crime

Question 8

Evaluation? ✅

Answer 8

• college students who visited Disneyland as children asked to evaluate advertising material containing 1. Bugs Bunny (not a Disney character), 2. Ariel (not introduced at time of their childhood)
• compared to control group, participants assigned to either Bugs or Ariel group more likely to report having shaken hands with characters
• shows power of misleading info to create an inaccurate/false memory

Question 9

Evaluation? ✅

Answer 9

• strength is application to CJS
• DNA exoneration cases have shown that mistaken eyewitness identification was largest factor in contributing to conviction of innocents
• demonstrates important role of EWT research in helping ensure innocents are not convicted for crimes they didn’t commit, on basis of faulty EWT

Question 10

Evaluation? ❌

Answer 10

• Bekerian and Bowers 1983: found participants are not susceptible to misleading info if questions are presented in same order as original data
• suggests order of questions has a significant effect
• memory change was due to response bias not storage
• provides alternative explanation and highlights importance of question order in police interviews