Cognitive Debate: EWT Flashcards
(26 cards)
INTRODUCTION TO DEBATE
Loftus has been a pioneer of memory research since the 1970’s. She has dedicated her life’s work to understanding how memory can reconstructed.
The result of this can have catastrophic consequences, when giving evidence as an eyewitness to a crime in a court of law, such as wrong convictions.
Therefore, there is still much debate regarding whether eyewitness testimony can be relied upon as evidence to criminal behaviour.
We can look at three aspects of EWT: Weapon Focus, Leading Questions, Reconstructive memory
POINT 1/3 weapon focus| FOR |outline
One reason why EWT could be considered unreliable is due to the concept of weapons focus. This refers to the idea that the presence of a weapon can distract witnesses and reduce the accuracy of their recall of other details about the event.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus | FOR | example
Loftus et al. (1987) conducted a lab experiment to test the impact of weapons focus on accuracy of recall. Participants were shown a scenario where either a weapon (a gun) or a neutral object (a cheque) was present.
Participants in the weapon condition focused more on the weapon and had poorer recall of peripheral details.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus|FOR | SOCIAL implication
However, as the experiment was conducted in a LAB, it lacks ecological validity.
Witnesses may react differently in real-life situations with heightened emotions: high levels of stress, emotional arousal, and real consequences, which are difficult to replicate in an artificial environment.
If we know that this can be a problem, we may be able to educate potential witnesses of the effect to mitigate it’s impact (e.g. bank tellers, shop workers).
Research by Pickel (1999) found that when participants were trained to recognise and understand the weapon focus effect, they were better able to overcome it.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus FOR | link
Therefore, while this study suggests that the presence of a weapon reduces reliability in EWT, the artificiality of the lab environment limits the generalisability of these findings.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus| AGAINST | outline
However, there is also evidence to suggest that the presence of a weapon does not affect the accuracy of recall.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus| AGAINST | example
-Yuille and Cutshall (1986) carried out a case study of a real-life shooting outside a gun shop in Canada.
-A thief was shot and killed by the shop owner, and 13 eyewitnesses who had seen the event clearly were later interviewed by the researchers around four to five months after the incident.
-The study found that the presence of a weapon did not reduce the accuracy of the eyewitnesses’ memories. Most of the details they gave were highly accurate and matched police records.
-Even misleading questions had little impact on their recall.
-This SUGGESTS that in real-life, high-stress situations, memory can be more reliable than lab studies often suggest.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus| AGAINST | ETHICAL implication
As this was a case study, it provides high ecological validity due to the real-life setting, but findings may lack generalisability as it only examined one event.
POINT 1/3 weapon focus| AGAINST | link
Therefore, this evidence suggests that EWT can be reliable even in the presence of a weapon because it reflects real-world accuracy. If we educate people on the weapon focus effect, we may be able to reduce it’s impact on EWT.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| FOR | outline
Leading questions can influence witnesses by suggesting specific answers, making EWT less reliable.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| FOR | example
Loftus and Palmer (1974) investigated the impact of leading questions by showing participants videos of car accidents and asking questions with different verbs (e.g., “smashed” vs. “hit”).
The verb used influenced participants’ speed estimates and whether they falsely recalled seeing broken glass
POINT 2/3 leading questions| FOR |SOCIAL implication
The findings have significant implications for how police and legal professionals question witnesses. It highlights the need for caution in phrasing questions to avoid unintentionally influencing memory, potentially reducing wrongful convictions.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| FOR | link
Thus, leading questions demonstrate the unreliability of EWT, but this research also provides guidance for improving legal practice
POINT 2/3 leading questions| AGAINST | outline
Some research suggests that leading questions do not always distort memory.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| AGAINST | example
Coxon and Valentine (1997) investigated the effects of misleading questions across different age groups: 8-year-olds, 17-year-olds, and 70-year-olds who all watched a staged crime and were then asked questions about what they saw. The study found that the 8-year-olds were significantly more influenced by misleading information, often incorporating false details into their recall. However, the 17-year-olds and 70-year-olds were much less affected, showing higher resistance to suggestion and better accuracy.
Suggests that leading questions do not universally distort memory, and that factors such as age and cognitive development play a key role.
Therefore, the impact of leading questions may be OVERSTATED in some research, especially when applied to older children, teenagers, or adults who may have stronger memory processing and critical thinking skills.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| AGAINST | Economical
Misleading or inaccurate eyewitness testimony can lead to costly legal errors, such as wrongful convictions and retrials.
Berkeley Law, at California university, estimate that just 607 faulty convictions cost taxpayers $221 million via prosecution, incarceration and later settlement.
Understanding how different age groups respond to questioning, = legal system can adopt better interviewing practices, reducing the economic burden associated with appeals, compensation claims, and prison costs.
POINT 2/3 leading questions| AGAINST | link
Therefore, in real-world settings, EWT can still be reliable despite exposure to leading questions, but practices must consider impact of AGE.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| FOR | outline
Reconstructive memory suggests that witnesses’ memories are influenced by schemas, leading to distortions. For example, people may unconsciously “fill in the gaps” based on their expectations or stereotypes.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| FOR | example
Yarmey (2004) conducted research showing that eyewitnesses can be influenced by stereotypes when recalling suspects.
In one of her studies, participants watched a staged crime and were later asked to describe the suspect. Many of them tended to describe the suspect in ways that matched common criminal stereotypes—for example, identifying someone who looked rough or threatening as the likely offender, even if that person wasn’t involved.
This suggests that expectations and pre-existing beliefs about what a “criminal” looks like can distort memory and lead to inaccurate identifications.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| FOR | SOCIAL implication
The reliance on reconstructive memory could perpetuate stereotypes in the justice system, disproportionately impacting marginalized groups.
This highlights a critical need for awareness and training in order to avoid bias in legal procedures.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| FOR | link
Thus, reconstructive memory demonstrates that EWT can be unreliable due to schema distortions, with far-reaching implications for fairness in the legal system.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory AGAINST | outline
However, in some real-world cases, memory recall remains accurate despite the potential influence of schemas.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| AGAINST | example
Saks and Ackerman (2002) conducted a study to investigate how memory is affected over time, particularly in relation to eyewitness testimony. After long periods of time= eyewitnesses were able to accurately recall the core details of an event, EG: appearance of a perpetrator or the sequence of actions.
-Although there was some variability in the recall of minor details, the MAJOR elements of the memory remained largely intact.
-Even when memory is subject to reconstructive processes, these processes may not always distort the core elements of memory
-While peripheral details might be influenced or reconstructed, the central features of an event often remain accurate, supporting the idea that eyewitness memory can be reliable despite the potential for reconstruction.
POINT 3/3 reconstructive memory| AGAINST | ETHICAL implication
An ethical implication is that relying on EWT as reliable in cases of serious crimes can reduce the trauma experienced by victims. If EWT is considered credible in real-world situations, it may prevent victims from having to repeatedly justify their accounts, reducing the psychological burden during the legal process.
