Week 5.1 Flashcards
Elizabeth F. Loftus is a good example of (3)
- An academic researcher in the area of criminology
- An expert witness
- Someone who faced litigation
About Loftus (4)
- Loftus is an American cognitive psychologist and memory expert
- Loftus is best known for her ground-breaking work on the misinformation bias and eyewitness testimony
- She also studied the creation and nature of false memories [including recovered memories] of childhood sexual abuse
- Loftus has been heavily involved in applying her research to legal settings; she has consulted or provided expert witness testimony for over 250 cases
Loftus & Palmer (1974)
Both groups saw the same accident:
- Group A: Estimate speed of cars when they hit each other
- Group B: Estimate speed of cars when they smashed into each other
Loftus & Palmer (1974) findings
Loftus found information/context systematically distorted memory recall
- Smashed = highest predicted speed (around 40mph)
- Collided = second highest predicted speed
- Bumped = third highest predicted speed
- Hit = second lowest predicted speed
- Contacted = lowest predicted speed (around 30mph)
Eyewitnesses…
Eyewitnesses reconstruct memories when questioned
What did these findings match?
These findings matched false convictions [type 1 errors]
How many executed people were found to be innocent using DNA evidence?
Around 2% of people executed in America were found to be innocent using DNA testing
Leading cause of wrongful conviction in DNA exoneration cases
- Eyewitness misidentification ~ 70%
- Forensic science ~ 50%
- False confession ~ 25%
- Informant ~17%
What did Loftus’ work focus on in the 1990s?
In the early 1990s, the focus of Loftus’ work shifted to investigating whether it was possible to implant false memories
Reason for Loftus’ research (5)
- The impetus for this line of research was a case for which Loftus had been asked to provide expert testimony
- The case of George Franklin who stood accused of murder, but the only evidence against him was provided by his daughter
- His daughter, undergoing therapy, recovered the memory of observing her father raping and murdering her childhood friend
- Loftus gave evidence about the malleability of memory, but had to concede that she did not know of any research about the repressed memory Franklin-Lipsker was claiming to have;
- George Franklin was convicted (though later released upon appeal)
Loftus & Pickrell (1990) (4)
- The “Lost in the Mall” experiment,isa memory
implantation technique used to demonstrate that
confabulations about events that never took place: such as havingbeen lostin a shoppingmallas a child - They asked 24 participants to try to remember childhood events that had been recounted to us by a parent, an older sibling or another close relative.
- However, a false event [being lost in a familiar mall] using information provided by a relative was included.
- The lost-in-the-mall scenario included the following elements: lost for an extended period, crying, aid and comfort by an elderly woman and, finally, reunion with the family
Loftus & Pickrell (1990) findings (2)
- The participants recalled something about 49 of the 72 true events (68 percent) immediately after the initial reading of the booklet and also in each of the two follow-up interviews.
- After reading the booklet, seven of the 24 participants (29 percent) remembered either partially or fully the false event constructed for them, and in the two follow-up interviews six participants (25 percent) continued to claim that they remembered the fictitious event.
What case had the biggest negative impact on Loftus?
The case that has arguably had the biggest negative impact on Loftus is that of Taus versus Loftus
Taus versus Loftus
- In response to a published case study on recovered memory, Loftus investigated the case using public records and interviewing people connected to Taus.
- She uncovered information not included in the original article - information that they thought strongly suggested Taus’ memory of abuse was false
- At this time, Taus contacted the University and accused Loftus of breaching her privacy
- In response, the university confiscated Loftus’ files and put Loftus under investigation for 21 months, forbidding her to share her findings in the meantime. She was eventually cleared of all wrongdoing and allowed to publish her findings
Result of Taus versus Loftus outcome (4)
- As a consequence, Loftus, the University of Washington and a few others were sued by Taus, claiming:
- Invasion of privacy
- Defamation
- Fraud
- Infliction of emotional distress
- Misrepresentation [lied to get interviews with Taus’ foster mother]
- The court dismissed all but one count
- The misrepresentation count was settled when Loftus’ insurance company agreed to a nuisance settlement
