Module 3 Part 2: Social psychology and the law

Question 1

Does certainty actual mean accuracy?

Answer 1

no. numerous studies have shown that a witness’s confidence is not strongly related to his
or her accuracy

Unfortunately, judges and jurors still believe the more certain/confident witness.

Question 2

signs of accurate testimony

Answer 2

1. if witness sees suspect “pop out” during a lineup. Inaccurate witnesses tended to say that they used a process of elimination. Therefore, people are most accurate when they make their judgment quickly in 10 seconds or less

Question 3

T/F: it is beneficial to try and write down the description of the offender as soon as you witness a crime.

Answer 3

false. studies show that trying to put an image of a face into words can make people’s memory worse.

They showed
students a film of a bank robbery. Participants in the verbalization condition were
asked to write a detailed description of the robber’s face. Those in the no-verbalization
condition spent the same amount of time completing an unrelated task. All students
then tried to identify the robber from a photo lineup of eight faces. The results? Only
38 percent of the people in the verbalization condition correctly identified the robber,
compared with 64 percent of the people in the no-verbalization condition

Question 4

T/F: its easy to tell whether eyewitnesses are lying

Answer 4

false. On average, people were correct only 54 percent of the time (where 50 percent
would be guessing at chance levels).
confidence that you have correctly identified the lies and truths is
not strongly correlated with accuracy

Question 5

methods of trying to improve eyewitness testimony

Answer 5

1. hypnosis. concluded that there is no hard evidence that people’s memories improve when they are hypnotized
   - In fact, there is some evidence that when people
   are under hypnosis they are more susceptible to suggestion, coming to believe they
   saw things that they did not (Patry, Stinson, & Smith, 2009). Even worse, people tend
   to become more confident in their memories after they have been hypnotized, even if
   they are no more accurate
2. COGNITIVE INTERVIEW:A technique in which a trained
   interviewer tries to improve eyewitnesses’ memories by focusing
   their attention on the details and
   context of the event

Question 6

why is it dangerous to use hypnosis when trying to improve eyewitness testimony truthfulness?

Answer 6

hypnosis often increases confidence in memories afterward, even if they are no more accurate.

this is dangerous because as we saw earlier, juries often interpret a witness’s confidence as a gauge of his or her accuracy, even though confidence is not strongly related to accuracy.

Question 7

recovered memories

Answer 7

recollections of an event, such as sexual abuse, that has been forgotten or repressed.

Question 8

false memory syndrome

Answer 8

People can recall a past traumatic experience that is objectively
false but that they believe is true

Question 9

tendencies with truthful versus fabricated reports of traumatic experiences

Answer 9

It turned out that descriptions of fabricated traumatic events contained
fewer specific details about time and place than did descriptions of actual traumas
and were rated as less believable by coders (who didn’t know which accounts were
real and which were fabricated). When asked about their reactions to these events,
participants reported stronger emotional reactions to the fabricated traumas than to
the actual traumas—even though when describing these events, fabricated accounts
actually were less emotional than accounts of actual traumas. This tendency to “go
over the top” when reporting on reactions to fabricated traumas was also reflected in
participants’ reports of how much they thought about the event, their level of traumatic stress, and their experience of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms—all of
these reactions were reported more strongly when describing a fake, rather than a
real, traumatic event. Thus, when attempting to determine whether an accusation is
true or false, investigators might do well to rely on the signs of fabrication identified
in this work

Question 10

tendencies with truthful versus fabricated reports of traumatic experiences

Answer 10

It turned out that descriptions of fabricated traumatic events contained
fewer specific details about time and place than did descriptions of actual traumas
and were rated as less believable by coders (who didn’t know which accounts were
real and which were fabricated). When asked about their reactions to these events,
participants reported stronger emotional reactions to the fabricated traumas than to
the actual traumas—even though when describing these events, fabricated accounts
actually were less emotional than accounts of actual traumas. This tendency to “go
over the top” when reporting on reactions to fabricated traumas was also reflected in
participants’ reports of how much they thought about the event, their level of traumatic stress, and their experience of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms—all of
these reactions were reported more strongly when describing a fake, rather than a
real, traumatic event. Thus, when attempting to determine whether an accusation is
true or false, investigators might do well to rely on the signs of fabrication identified
in this work.

This also occurs when people are instructed to try and apologize for a crime they didn’t commit – when they apologize for a fake crime, they cry more and have more pauses rather than if they confess to a crime they actually did commit.

Question 11

other kinds of evidence

Answer 11

1. expert testimony (scientists)
2. physical evidence
3. statistical evidence

Question 12

T/F PHYSICAL evidence alone is very convincing.

Answer 12

It turned out that physical evidence alone was not very convincing to these mock
jurors—only 18 percent of them rendered a guilty verdict. In sharp contrast, 72 percent
of participants who received eyewitness testimony believed that the defendant was
guilty.

Question 13

T/F: jury members understand all of the complex evidence

Answer 13

false.

According to research conducted at Simon Fraser University, jury members’
comprehension of the instructions given to them by judges is remarkably
low. In one of the studies in this research program, participants acting as
mock jurors understood just over 60 percent of what they had been told

Question 14

two ways that lawyers typically present evidence

Answer 14

1. story order (more effective)

2. witness order.

Question 15

reasons why confessions may be false

Answer 15

1. investigators may ask leading questions because they are primed and convinced that the suspect is guilty.
2. put the suspect under stress/ coercion
3. people are prone to suggestion

Question 16

reasons why confessions may be false

Answer 16

1. investigators may ask leading questions because they are primed and convinced that the suspect is guilty.
2. put the suspect under stress/ coercion
3. people are prone to suggestion

Question 17

Mr Big Confessions

Answer 17

This technique tends to be used in serious
criminal cases and involves undercover officers enticing the suspect to commit small
crimes in exchange for money, the promise of gang membership, and so on. At some
point, the suspect is told that he will be meeting the head of the gang or organization
(i.e., “Mr. Big”) and reasons will be given for why the suspect needs to “come clean”
before he can be accepted into the gang. Sometimes the suspect will be told that police
have evidence that he is guilty of the crime that is under investigation. This technique
has produced a high rate of confessions (75 percent). However, given the intense pressure that is put on suspects, there is evidence that at least some suspects cave in

Question 18

T/F: police evidence plays a large role in the success of confession.

Answer 18

true. Offenders who believed that the police
had strong evidence against them were more likely
to confess than those who believed that the evidence
was weak

Question 19

in order to ensure that police are not using overly harsh interogation techniques that could lead to a false confession, interrogations are typically recorded. however, what is a problem with this?

Answer 19

1. contextual info could be missing if juries fail to see the interactions between video recordings
2. Almost all videos of interrogations focus on the suspect rather than
   on the interrogator asking the questions. Well, of course they do, you might think—the
   whole point is to judge how the suspect is responding to the questioning, so it is no surprise that the camera focuses on him or her.

BUTpeople’s judgments about the causes of another person’s behaviour are influenced by what is visually
salient to them. When we focus our attention on one person in a group, we tend to think
that he or she is having a disproportionately large influence on the conversation.

People thought that the confession was
most voluntary (i.e., the least coerced) when the camera focused on the suspect; here,
people had the sense that the suspect was in charge of what was happening. When the
camera showed both the suspect and the interrogator, people thought the confession
was less voluntary. When the camera focused only on the interrogator, people thought
the confession was the least voluntary (the most coerced).

Question 20

If jury deliberation is stacked toward the initial majority opinion, why not
just abandon the deliberation process, letting the jury’s initial vote determine a
defendant’s guilt or innocence?

(recall// juror dissidents who do not agree with the majority and try to hold out often just end up getting removed from the juror position

Answer 20

it wouldn’t be good for two reasons:
1. forcing juries to reach a unanimous verdict makes them consider the evidence more carefully, rather than simply assuming that their initial impressions
of the case were correct

2. even
   if minorities seldom succeed in persuading the majority to change their minds
   about guilt or innocence, minorities often do change people’s minds about how
   guilty a person is.

Question 21

If jury deliberation is stacked toward the initial majority opinion, why not
just abandon the deliberation process, letting the jury’s initial vote determine a
defendant’s guilt or innocence?

(recall// juror dissidents who do not agree with the majority and try to hold out often just end up getting removed from the juror position

Answer 21

it wouldn’t be good for two reasons:
1. forcing juries to reach a unanimous verdict makes them consider the evidence more carefully, rather than simply assuming that their initial impressions
of the case were correct

2. even
   if minorities seldom succeed in persuading the majority to change their minds
   about guilt or innocence, minorities often do change people’s minds about how
   guilty a person is.

Question 22

deterrence theory

Answer 22

people refrain from criminal activity because of the threat of legal punishment.

Question 23

according to the deterrence theory, the punishment must be:

Answer 23

perceived as relatively severe, certain, and swift.

In general, severe penalties will work
as a deterrent only when people know what the penalties are, believe that they
are relatively certain to be caught, and weigh the consequences before deciding
whether to commit a crime

Question 24

2 assumptions about deterrence theory

Answer 24

1. people are aware of the penalty
2. people are in complete control over the behaviour/circumstance.

for many crimes, these assumptions do not hold. therefore, deterrence theory often is perceived as unjust.

Question 25

in terms of drunk driving, how does the deterrence theory play a role

Answer 25

These U.S. studies have found that increasing the severity of penalties for
drunk driving is not related, by itself, to a lower rate of alcohol-related motor vehicle
fatalities. Consistent with deterrence theory, however, increasing the certainty of being caught for drunk driving—by checking the blood alcohol level of all motorists
stopped at sobriety checkpoints—is associated with a lower rate of alcohol-related accidents

These results suggest that severity of the penalty itself does not act as a deterrent but that an increase in the certainty of being caught does.

Question 26

T/F: death penalty prevents murders

Answer 26

false. there is no evidence that the death penalty prevents murder.

Opponents of the death penalty point out, as we mentioned earlier, that most murders are crimes of passion that are not preceded by a rational consideration of the consequences. Because people are not considering the consequences of their actions, the death
penalty does not act as a deterrent. A further argument for not using the death penalty is
that an astonishing number of innocent people have been sentenced to death.

Question 27

why have we witnessed a bizarre feature in which violent crime INCREASES when death penalty and subsequent execution occurs swiftly?

Answer 27

observing someone else commit a violent act weakens people’s inhibitions against aggression, leads to imitation of aggression,
and numbs their sense of horror over violence. Could it be that observing the government put someone to death lowers other people’s inhibitions, making them more likely
to commit murders?

Question 28

2 ways to overall preventing crime

Answer 28

1. increase the penalties for breaking the law and the probability that people will be caught and the punishment will be certain and swift.
2. convince people that the law is just and fair.

Question 29

procedural justice

Answer 29

peoples judgements about the fairness of the procedures used to determine outcomes, such as whether they are innocent or guilty of a crime.

it has been found that people who feel that they have been treated fairly are more likely to comply with the law than are people who feel that they have been treated unfairly.