Thematic Q

Question 1

Haw and Fisher (2004)

Answer 1

High Administrator-Witness Contact (sitting together) means witness is sig. more likely to make an ID in line with the administrators beliefs on who the suspect is compared to low contact - lab study = low eco. validity, student Ps, photo lineups

Question 2

Sharman and Quiroz (2016)

Answer 2

Double-Blind procedure sig. reduces the likelihood that the witness will choose a lineup member consistent with the administrators believes on who the suspect is (in target absent lineups)

Question 3

Wright et al (2001)

Answer 3

demonstrated cross-race effect in the UK and Cape Town, where black/ white confederate approached Ps and spoke for 15-30s before a researcher approached and asked for ID using forced choice simultaneous photo lineup - field study but not police procedure

Question 4

Hehman et al (2010)

Answer 4

Out group effect on ID accuracy, whereby accuracy is worse for any salient out group irrespective of another (race/ school affiliation)

Question 5

Carpenter & Krendl (2016)

Answer 5

In group effect on witness reliability, whereby a witness to in group on in group crime is more accepting of misleading information than witnesses to out group crime - but crime shown on slides, student Ps

Question 6

Fisher and Geiselman (1992)

Answer 6

Enhanced Cognitive Interview, involves reinstating the context, changing perspectives, changing orders

Question 7

Memon et al (2010)

Answer 7

meta-analysis shows enhanced cognitive interview is effective in adults

Question 8

Memon et al (1998)

Answer 8

argue that children may struggle with the instructions in the cognitive interview, specifically changing perspectives

Question 9

Verkampt & Ginet (2009)

Answer 9

Enhanced Cognitive Interview more effective than the standard structured interview when questioning children, and change order instruction reduced subsequent acceptance of misinformation - used interactive painting session

Question 10

LaPaglia et al (2014)

Answer 10

Cognitive Interview increases subsequent acceptance of misleading information and therefore suggestibility

Question 11

Piaget (1967)

Answer 11

Conservation

Question 12

Mehler-Broaddus et al (1998)

Answer 12

ability to conserve both number and mass linked to less acceptance of misleading information when then questioning about completing the tasks - high eco. validity, but no stress

Question 13

Mehler & Bever (1967)

Answer 13

children as young as 5 years olds can conserve

Question 14

Valentine et al (2003)

Answer 14

archival study on London lineups shows no cross race effect, but not causal, no control

Question 15

Benton et al (2006)

Answer 15

90% of experts say the cross race effect is reliable enough to use in court as expert testimony