Yuille And Cutshall Describe Flashcards
What type of study is this and why?
This is an example of a field study because the crime was real but the IV of leading questions was still manipulated after the event.
What was the naturally occurring real life crime?
A gun shop in Canada was robbed in broad daylight. As the thief was escaping, the shop owner followed him on to the street. Both had guns. The thief fired twice and the shop owner fired 6 times, the thief was killed.
How were the police able to get a detailed account of the incident?
There were many witnesses to the event and all had a clear view. Also, because the witnesses could corroborate each other’s accounts which could then be linked to forensic evidence about the event.
What was the main aim of the study? (3 points)
To look at the problems of laboratory research in studying eyewitness testimony
To look at the accuracy of eyewitness accounts
To compare eyewitness accounts taken straight after an incident with those taken four to five months after.
What was another aim?
Another aim was to see how eyewitness memory could be affected by leading questions.
How long after the gunshooting did this study take place?
four to five months before
How many witnesses were asked to take part in the research?
21
How many agreed to take part in the research?
13
How many had been originally interviewed by the police?
All 21.
What happened to the 13?
They were interview by the researchers.
How were the interviews conducted and how were they similar to the ones done by the police.
The interviews followed the same style as the police interviews: the participants were asked to describe the event and were then asked questions about it.
How many leading questions were added to the researchers interviews?
2
What was the first leading question?
one asked about the thief’s car headlight (“did you see the broken headlight?”)
What was the second leading question?
The other asked about the car quarter panel (“did you see the yellow quarter panel?”).
What were the real facts regarding the leading questions?
The headlight was not broken, and the quarter panel was blue.
How many were asked leading questions and how many were asked non-leading variants?
Half and half.
What were the two non-leading variants?
(“did you see a broken headlight” and “did you see a yellow quarter panel?”)
What were the participants also asked? (two things)
The participants were asked about their emotional state and stress levels before and after the incident, and were also asked whether they had any problems afterwards
How were the results on the two seperate questions recorded?
These results were recorded on a 7 point likert scale – 1 being perfectly calm and 7 being extremely anxious.
RESULTS. Who recorded more total details?
The RESULTS showed that the researchers recorded more total details than the police
how many total details did the police recall?
649 total details
How many total details did the researchers recall?
1056 total details
What did the research record? (HALF SOMETHING)
The researchers recorded half action, half descriptive details, whereas the police recorded more action details than descriptive details.
What were these results due to?
This was largely due to the fact that the researchers asked more about descriptive details than the police.
How were the witnesses split?
The witnesses were split into peripheral and central witnesses
how many of the witnesses were central and peripheral.
7 of the witnesses were central, and 6 were peripheral
What were the accuracy ratings?
Both of these groups were equally accurate in their accounts, with 84% of central witnesses were accurate, and 79% of peripheral witnesses were accurate
What were the effects of leading questions?
leading questions did not effect the witness’s memories.
What was the conclusion?
Eyewitness statements are accurate, more accurate than laboratory experiments would suggest.
Although fairly equal, central witnesses were more accurate; something laboratory studies can’t capture.
What year was this?
1986
