Yarmey (2004)

Question 1

What do field studies do in terms of generalisability!

Answer 1

Field experiments help to raise both the generalisability and the ecological validity of studies.

Question 2

Why is a lack of realism such a particular concern in the field of eyewitness memory?

Answer 2

Because of the need to apply findings about eyewitness testimony to actual court procedures.

Question 3

What has been found in regards to objects and people?

Answer 3

Harmed explained that research has found that in general, objects and people who are more relevant and central to the situation are better remembered by witnesses.

Question 4

What did Haber and Haber 2001 do?

Answer 4

They analysed 48 studies on eyewitness identification in a lineup. The person to be identified was present in the lineup.

Question 5

In what percentage of the cases was the target identified correctly?

Answer 5

In 51% of the ceases the target was correctly identified by the witness.

Question 6

In what percentage of the cases was a target incorrectly identified?

Answer 6

In 27% of the cases a target was wrongly identified.

Question 7

In other studies where the target was not included in the lineup, what was the chance of incorrect identification?

Answer 7

There was a 57% chance of incorrect identification when the target was not included.

Question 8

Why is it thought that covering the eyes would affect identification?

Answer 8

Because research has found that eyes are a main feature used in identification.

Question 9

What is it to give enhanced retrieval instructions?

Answer 9

The act of going over the event before recall and being asked questions to help with recall. Suggested by the cognitive interview technique.

Question 10

What was the aim of Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 10

This study had an aim to look at the effects on males and females of being part of a field experiment related to eyewitness recall and photo identification.

Question 11

What was another aim of Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 11

Another aim of the study was to see how far a disguise (sunglasses and baseball cap) affected retrieval.

Question 12

What was an issue that was thought to affect identification?

Answer 12

Whether instructions given just before recall, to review an incident, would affect the identification.

Question 13

Why did the study use a 4-hour time gap?

Answer 13

This was done to investigate the effect of this gap on eyewitness recall.

Question 14

How many male participants were involved in the procedure of Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 14

215 male pps

Question 15

How many female pps were involved in Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 15

375 female pps.

Question 16

What ages were the pps who we involved in the study?

Answer 16

The ages ranged from 18-70

Question 17

What race of people was used in the study?

Answer 17

Only white pps were used

Question 18

Why were only white people used in the study?

Answer 18

Only white pps were used in the study to avoid any race bias.

Question 19

How were the pps allocated to the different conditions?

Answer 19

Pps were randomly allocated to the different conditions.

Question 20

What were the different conditions of the procedure?

Answer 20

Being prepared (told that they would be an eyewitness) or not
A disguise present (sunglasses and baseball cap) or not
Retrieval instructions enhanced or not
Tested immediately or delayed by 4 hours
The gender of witness (male or female)
Whether or not the target was present in a lineup.

Question 21

Who were the targets to be identified?

Answer 21

Two white women.

Question 22

During the actual procedure, how were the pps collected?

Answer 22

They were approached by a target in a public place and asked to help look for lost jewellery or asked for directions.

Question 23

What happened after 2 minutes?

Answer 23

After 2 mins a female researcher went up to the pp and asked to take part in the study

Question 24

When did the researcher ask about the identification of the target?

Answer 24

The researcher either asked there and then or 4 hours later.

Question 25

Witnesses were given a questionnaire. How many items were on it?

Answer 25

16 items.

Question 26

How many items were about the physical appearance of the target?

Answer 26

8

Question 27

How many items were about the clothing of the target?

Answer 27

8

Question 28

How did they rate their confidence about the answers?

Answer 28

They did so on a 7-point scale.

Question 29

After completing the questionnaire, what were the witnesses given?

Answer 29

They were given a set of 6 photos after completion of the questionnaire.

Question 30

In how many cases was the target present in the photos?

Answer 30

In half the cases, the target was present in the photos

Question 31

In how many cases was the target absent in the photos?

Answer 31

In half the cases, the target was absent in the photos.

Question 32

What were the pps told when asked to identify the female target?

Answer 32

They were told that she might not be in the photos

Question 33

How many times were the witnesses shown each photo?

Answer 33

They were shown each photo only once.

Question 34

What happened at the end of the study?

Answer 34

At the end of the study there was a debriefing

Question 35

What happened in another part of the study?

Answer 35

In another part of the study, the whole scenario was given to students in written form.

Question 36

What were the students asked to do?

Answer 36

They were asked to comment on what they thought would happen and what would affect eyewitness recall.

Question 37

In the results, why were the results and analyses complex?

Answer 37

Because there were so many conditions.

Question 38

What kind of differences were found?

Answer 38

Between the various conditions, various differences were found.

Question 39

What percentage of the pps identifies the target correctly when she was present in the lineup?

Answer 39

About 49% of pps

Question 40

What percentage of pps correctly said that the target was not there in the ‘target absent’ condition?

Answer 40

62% of pps.

Question 41

In the conclusion, what did the study find regarding the amount of times a witness makes a correct identification in a lineup when the target is present?

Answer 41

The study found that about 50% of the time a witness makes a correct identification in a lineup with the target present.

Question 42

How does the conclusion of the study compare with Haber and Haber’s 2001 study?

Answer 42

The conclusion corresponds closely with the findings of Haber and Haber’s 2001 meta-analysis.

Question 43

How does Yarmey’s study have practical applications?

Answer 43

Because it casts doubt on the assumption that jurors should accept eyewitness accounts on the sole basis that they were present. This is because that doesn’t guarantee accuracy.

Question 44

How accurate were the students’ judging of what would happen?

Answer 44

The students judging of what would happen were not accurate. Jurors are likely to have similar assumptions to the students.

Question 45

What is a strength of Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 45

Haber and Haber’s 2001 findings is supported by the findings of the photo lineup. This suggests some reliability in the study.

Question 46

What did both Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 and Haber and Haber’s 2001 study?

Answer 46

Both studies found that when the target is present in a lineup identification, witnesses tend to be about 50% accurate.

Question 47

What is another strength of Daniel Yarmey’s 2004 study?

Answer 47

The study has ecological validity as it was carried out in the natural environment of the pps.
They were simply going about their day as normal until the researcher approached them

Question 48

What is another strength of the study?

Answer 48

It is likely to be found to be reliable as strict controls were put in place and so it is replicable.
The study also has supporting evidence from other studies e.g. Haber and Haber 2001

Question 49

What is another strength of the study?

Answer 49

There is likely to be good generalisability of the findings be ages of the range of ages of the pps as well as the focus on gender to ensure a good balance.

Question 50

What is a weakness of the study?

Answer 50

This study found that age was better identified than other physical characteristics such as height and weight. It is not supported by Yuille and Cutshall’s 1974 study. Their study found more or less the opposite of Yarmey’s.

Question 51

What is another weakness of the study?

Answer 51

Even though the study itself has ecological validity, the tasks lack validity.
The photo lineup is not the same as a real life line up. In real life, the build, stance and other forms of body language would have been present. These are characteristics that cannot be incorporated into photos which means that the would have been more focus on facial characteristics like hair and eyes rather than the entirety of the individuals.

Question 52

What is another weakness of this study?

Answer 52

The findings of the study cannot be applied to all situations.
The witness recall focuses on a situation where the pp had met +& spoken to the target which is not always the case for an eyewitness to an event.

Question 53

What are the concerns about laboratory studies in regards to generalisability?

Answer 53

The findings from lab studies lack realism and validity.