Memory

Question 1

Short term memory (STM)

Answer 1

-memory for immediate events.
-seconds.
-disappears unless rehearsed.
-limited storage.
-coded acoustically (sound)

Question 2

Long term memory (LTM)

Answer 2

-memory for past events.
-lasts anywhere from 2 mins to unlimited.
-coded semantically (meaning).

Question 3

Who created the MSM?

Answer 3

Atkinson & Shiffrin (1996)

Question 4

Features of multi-store model: sensory register

Answer 4

2 main stores:
-echoic memory = sound coded info.
-iconic memory = visual coded info.

Capacity:
-extremely high as eyes store strong data like over 100 cells.

Duration:
-short - under a second.
-little info from sensory register is passed onto STM.

Question 5

Features of multi-store model: STM store

Answer 5

Coding:
-acoustic

Capacity:
-limited
-between 5-9 pieces of info.

Duration:
-without rehearsal, about 30 seconds.

Question 6

Features of multi-store model: LTM a store

Answer 6

Coding:
-semantic

Capacity:
-unlimited

Duration:
-many years

Question 7

Coding definition

Answer 7

The format in which memory is stored in.

Question 8

Capacity definition

Answer 8

How much info can be held in a memory store.

Question 9

Duration definition

Answer 9

How long info can be stored.

Question 10

Features of STM - capacity : Jacobs (1887)

Answer 10

-measured digit span
-researcher read out 4, then 5, etc digits until ppt couldn’t recall order correctly.
-mean span for digits = 9.3
-mean spam for letters = 7.3

Question 11

Evaluation of Jacobs

Answer 11

-been replicated.
-old research without adequate controls.
-ppts could have been distracted when testing (confounding variable).
-confirmed by controlled study (Bopp & Verhaeghen).

Question 12

Features of STM - capacity : Miller (1956)

Answer 12

Noted things come in sevens:
-7 deadly sins, 7 days of week etc.
- chunking improves STM. (Grouping digits or letters into chunks).
- 7 plus or minus 2

Question 13

Evaluation of Miller

Answer 13

:( may have overestimated capacity.
:( Cowan (2001) suggests memory storage is more limited to 4 plus or minus 1.

Question 14

Research on coding : Baddeley (1966a, 1966b)

Answer 14

Gave diff lists of words to 4 groups of ppts:
-acoustically similar
-acoustically dissimilar
-semantically similar
-semantically dissimilar

Ppts shown words & asked to recall in correct order:
- did worse in acoustically similar words .
- after 20 mins , did worse with semantically similar words.
-suggests info is coded acoustically in STM & semantically in LTM.

Question 15

Evaluation of Baddeley

Answer 15

:) identifies 2 different memory stores.
:) helps MSM.
:( artificial stimuli & cannot be applied to real life.
:( ignores visual coding.

Question 16

Features of STM - duration : Peterson & Peterson (1959)

Answer 16

-24 students in 8 trials given consonant syllable (JKG).
-given number & have to count backwards to prevent rehearsal.
-varied between (3,6,9,12,15,18) seconds.

-3 seconds = 80% recall.
-18 seconds = 3% recall.

Suggested STM duration may be about 18 seconds without rehearsal.

Question 17

Evaluation of Peterson & Peterson

Answer 17

:( artificial stimuli
:( lacks external validity
:) not fairly meaningless material (phone numbers)

Question 18

Features of LTM - duration: Bahrick et al (1975)

Answer 18

-studied 392 American ppts aged 17-74.
-obtained yearbooks from high school.

Test 1: photo recognition consisted of 50 photos, some from school, some not.
Test 2: free recall, simply list who they remembered.

-Ppts within 15 years, were 90% accurate in photo recognition. 48 years were 70% accurate.
-Free recall within 15 years were 60% accurate, within 48 years, 30% accurate.

Suggests LTM can last up to lifetime for some material.

Question 19

Evaluation of Bahrick et al

Answer 19

:) high external validity - meaningful memories (recall lower w meaningless memories -Shepard 1967)
:) historical validity
:( confounding variables - might look at yearbook often.

Mundane realism - common, usual task.

Question 20

Features of sensory register - duration: Sperling (1960)

Answer 20

-ppts saw a grid of 12 digits and letters for 50 million seconds.
-asked to write down all 2 or heard tone after exposure & they would write indicated row.

-when asked to recall whole thing 42% recall.
-when asked to recalls one row 75% recall.

Question 21

Strength of MSM: The case of HM

Answer 21

HM went through brain surgery to relieve his epilepsy.
Faulty procedure.
His hippocampus was removed.

-he could not form LTM.
-he would read same magazine repeatedly without remembering it.
-he had a great STM & performed well on immediate memory span.

:) shows that STM & LTM are different stores.

Question 22

Limitation of MSM: Shallice & Warrington (1970)

Answer 22

-Found evidence of more than 1 STM store.
-Studied a client called KF who had amnesia.
-KF had poor recall of digits when read out loud, but good recall when he read them visually himself.

& also found a distinction in store: one for verbal and non-verbal sounds.

Found that there are 3 types of STM: verbal, visual and spatial.

Question 23

Limitation of MSM: Craig & Watkins

Answer 23

Prolonged reversal not needed for transfer to LTM.
Found that type of rehearsal is more important than amount.
Elaborative rehearsal needed for long term storage (when you link info to existing knowledge).

Question 24

Strength of MSM: Baddeley

Answer 24

Showed STM & LTM are different

Counterpoint: not valid model of how memory works: not meaningful information.

Question 25

Types of LTM: Tulving (1985) (also limitation of MSM)

Answer 25

Criticism of MSM is that each memory store is classified as a unitary store.

Episodic, semantic & procedural memories.

Question 26

Episodic memories

Answer 26

-Refers to ability to recall events from our lives e.g. visit to dentist, breakfast.
-These memories are time-stamped so you recall when and what happened.
-Includes several elements: people, places objects etc.
-Conscious effort required for recall.

Question 27

Semantic memory

Answer 27

-Contains shared knowledge of work like an encyclopaedia.
-Knowledge of: how to apply to uni, concept of animals, meaning of words etc.
-Not time-stamped. Don’t remember when you learnt about concepts.
-Less personal and more factual.
-Tulving says less likely than episodic to forget.

Question 28

Procedural memory

Answer 28

-Memory for actions, skills.
-Recalled without conscious awareness or effort (automatic). E.g. change gears, riding bike.
-If you try to describe action, task becomes harder.

Question 29

Strength of types of LTM: Clive Wearing

Answer 29

Episodic memory damaged. He had amnesia that damaged hippocampus. Before this he was a world class musician & he could still play piano well but couldn’t remember musical education. Knows he has kids but doesn’t know names. He recognises wife but if she leaves room for few minutes he’ll act as tho he hasn’t seen her for years.

Supports Tulving’s view as it shows diff types of stores & one can be damaged while others are unaffected.

Counterpoint: lack of controls as no way of controlling what happened before memory loss. Difficult to judge how much worse memory is.

Question 30

Limitation of types of LTM: Buckner & Petersen (1996)

Answer 30

Conflicting research findings linking types of LTM to areas of the brain.
Concluded:
- episodic = right prefrontal cortex
- semantic = left prefrontal cortex
Other research links left with encoding of episodic and right with episodic retrieval (Tulving).

Challenges neurophysiological evidence to support types of LTM as there is poor agreement on where each type is located.

Brain scans are reliable and valid. Objective measure - no subjectivity.

Question 31

Strength of types of LTM: Belleville et al (2006)

Answer 31

Understanding LTM helps people with memory problems.
E.g. people age and have memory loss but research shows this is specific to episodic memory.

-Belleville devised intervention to improve episodic memories in older people.
-Trained group had better episodic memory than control group.

Distinguishing types of LTM enables treatments.

Question 32

Limitation of types of LTM : Tulving (2002)

Answer 32

-He says episodic and semantic are in the same store - declarative memories (actively recalled).
-Concluded its impossible to have functioning episodic memory with damaged semantic.

However, Hodges & Patterson found that some people with Alzheimer’s can form new episodic memories but not semantic.

Question 33

Working memory model (WMM) : Baddeley & Hitch (1974)

Answer 33

Part of STM you are using when you are working on something. The mental space that is active when temporarily storing info.

4 parts:
-central executive
-phonological loop
-visuo-spatial sketch pad
-episodic buffer

Question 34

Central executive

Answer 34

Supervisory role. Monitors incoming data and divides attention by allocating subsystems to tasks.
Limited processing capacity & doesn’t store info.

Question 35

Phonological loop (PL)

Answer 35

Deals with auditory info & preserves order in which information arrives:
-phonological store - stores words you hear.
- articulating process - allows maintenance rehearsal (repeating sounds/words in loop). Capacity of loop is believed to be 2 seconds worth of what you can say.

Question 36

Visio-spatial sketchpad (VSS)

Answer 36

Stores visual and/or spatial info. E.g. picturing windows in your house. Limited capacity (3-4 objects).
Logie (1995) divided VSS into:
-visual cache (visual data store)
-inner scribe (records arrangement of objects)

Question 37

Episodic buffer (EB)

Answer 37

Temporary store for info, integrates visual, spatial & verbal and maintains sense of time sequencing. Limited capacity of 4 chunks. Links WM to LTM and wider cognitive processes such as perception.

Question 38

Strength of WMM: Shallice & Warrington (1970)

Answer 38

KF case study where he had poor auditory info storage but good visual info processing.
His phonological loop was damaged but his visuo-spatial sketchpad was in tact.

Supports existence of separate visual and acoustic memory stores.

Counterpoint: unclear whether he had other cognitive impairments which may have affected performance since his injury was caused by motorcycle accident.

Question 39

Strength of WMM: Baddeley et al (1975)

Answer 39

Studies of dual task performance support separate existence of VSS m.
-ppts carried out verbal and visual task at same time and had decent similar performance as they used diff subsystems (PL & VSS)
-then both tasks where visual or both verbal, performance substantially declined.

Shows must be separate subsystem that process visual input & another for verbal processing.

Question 40

Limitation of WMM: Baddeley (2003)

Answer 40

Lack of clarity over nature of central executive.
-Baddeley said “CE is most important but least understood component”
-CE should be more specified & some psychologists believe CE consists of separate sub components.

Means CE is unsatisfactory & challenges integrity of WMM.

Question 41

Limitation of WMM: Validity of model

Answer 41

Studies use tasks that are unlike tasks in our everyday lives & carried out in highly controlled lab conditions.

Question 42

Word length effect

Answer 42

-Capacity of PL dependant on length of time it takes to say words.
-If word is polysyllabic it’s harder to remember.
-Harder to store list of long words as rehearsal takes longer.

Question 43

Forgetting: Interference theory

Answer 43

Forgetting takes place due to interference (when 2 pieces of info disrupt each other, resulting in forgetting in one or both).

Question 44

Types of interference

Answer 44

Proactive: older memory interferes with newer ones. E.g. remembering old names but not new. Old affects new.
Retroactive: newer memory interferes with an older one. E.g. learning new things in politics makes you forget old info. New affects old.

Question 45

Effects of similarity: McGeoch & Mcdonald (1931)

Answer 45

Interference is worse with similar memories.
Studied RI & changed amount of similarity in lists.
Students had to learn lists with 100% accuracy:
-synonyms
-acronyms
-unrelated words to original ones
-consonant syllables
-3 digit numbers
-no new list (control group)

The most similar material produced word recall.
-previously stored info makes new similar info hard to store.
-new info overwrites previous similar memories.

Question 46

Strength of interference: Baddeley & Hitch (1977)

Answer 46

Evidence of interference in everyday situations.
-asked rugby played to recall opponent team names.
-players who played the msot games had the poorest recall.
:) increases validity.

Counterpoint: conditions needed for interference to occur are rare. 2 memories have to be fairly similar in order to interfere.
Suggests other theories may be better explanations for forgetting in everyday life.

Question 47

Limitation of interference: Tulving & Psotka (1971)

Answer 47

Gave ppts list of words organised into categories one at a time.
-average recall 70% & got progressively worse as ppts learnt additional lists. (Interference)
-when given cued recall test & told names of categories, recall rose again to about 70%.

Shows interference is a temporary loss of accessibility.

Question 48

Strength of interference: Coenan & Luijtelaar (1997)

Answer 48

Given list of words.
-found list of words learnt under drug, recall was poorer than placebo control group.
-when list learned before drug, later recall was better than placebo.

Drug prevents new info from processing so it can’t interfere retroactively with stored information.

Shows forgetting can be due to interference & reduction of interference reduces forgetting.

Question 49

Forgetting: Retrieval failure

Answer 49

People forget info because of insufficient cues. When info is initially placed in memory, so are associated cues.

Question 50

Encoding specificity principle (ESP): Tulving (1983)

Answer 50

Without a cue, you’re more likely to forget what was learnt. The cues available at learning should be present at recall or the worse the memory & higher likelihood of forgetting.

Question 51

Meaningful & Non-meaningful cues

Answer 51

Meaningful - cues encoded at type of learning in a meaningful way. Like mnemonics can act as trigger for memories.
Non-meaningful - relate to external environment (context dependant cues) or internal state (state dependant cues).

Question 52

Research on context dependant forgetting: Godden & Baddeley (1975)

Answer 52

Deep sea divers learnt a list of words either underwater or on land. Then asked to recall.

4 conditions:
- learn on land/recall on land
- learn underwater/recall underwater
- learn on land/recall underwater
- learn underwater/recall on land

Recall was 40% lower in different state due to lack of external cues.

Question 53

Research on state dependant forgetting: Carter & Cassaday (1998)

Answer 53

Gave anti-histamine drugs to their participants that made them drowsy.
Ppts had to learn list of words.

4 conditions:
- learn on drug/recall on drug
- learn on drug/recall off drug
- learn off drug/recall on drug
- learn off drug/recall off drug

Conditions with mismatch of internal state had significantly worse recall. Learned better in same state despite being drowsy.

Question 54

Strength of retrieval cues: Baddeley

Answer 54

Retrieval cues can help overcome forgetting.
When you have trouble remembering something it’s worth the effort to recall the environment in which you learnt it in.
E.g. in room then go get something from another room then forget and enter original room to remember.

Shows how research can remind us of strategies we use in real world to improve recall.

Question 55

Strength of retrieval cues: Eysenck & Keane (2010)

Answer 55

Say retrieval failure is most common reason for forgetting by LTM.
Evidence shows retrieval failure occurs in real world situations as well as lab conditions.

Counterpoint: Baddeley (1997) suggests context effects aren’t very strong as “different contexts” have to be very different before effect is seen. Hard to find environment as different as land and underwater.
Therefore, retrieval failure due to lack of contextual cues may not expalin everyday forgetting.

Question 56

Limitation of retrieval failure: Recall vs Recognition: Godden & Baddeley (1980)

Answer 56

Context effects may depend substantially on type of memory being tested.
-they replicated underwater experiment with a replication test rather than recall.
-ppts had to say if they recognised words rather than retrieve it.
-performance was same in all 4 conditions.

Suggests retrieval failure is a limited explanation for forgetting as it only applies when person is recalling rather than recognising.

Question 57

Eval extra

Question 58

Eyewitness testimony: Misleading information

Answer 58

-Eyewitness testimony: ability to remember details of events such as accidents or crimes that they observed.
-Levelling: getting rid of ‘irrelevant’ info.
-Assimilation: added own interpretation of certain aspects in typical western story.
-Sharpening: ppt changed terms and used more familiar words to own cultural background.

Memories for events can be altered by our pre existing understanding of the world.

Question 59

What is meant by misleading info?

Answer 59

When info provided can affect how someone answers a question or remembers an event. E.g. if a car was described as “smashed” you may think it happened at faster speed than “bumped”.

Question 60

What are leading questions ?

Answer 60

A question, which because of the way it’s phrased suggests an answer.

Question 61

How do leading questions affect EWT?

Answer 61

1. Response-bias explanation: doesn’t affect memory but does influence how someone decides to answer.
2. Substitution explanation: the wording of a leading question actually changes memory of an event.

Question 62

Leading questions: Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Study 1

Answer 62

To investigate how info supplied after an event influences a person’s memory of the event.
-45 ppts shown 7 clips of car accidents.
-all asked “how far was cars going when they __________ each other”
-each group given diff verb (smashed,collided,hit,bumped,contracted).
-amongst other questions to reduce demand characteristics.

The more drastic word used, higher the prediction of speed. (smashed at 40.8mph).

Question 63

Leading questions: Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Study 2

Answer 63

To investigate substitution explanation.
-150 ppts shown film of accident.
-1 group asked “how fast when cars hit each other?” Another asked “how far when cars smashed each other?”
-3rd not asked about speed.
-1 week later asked “did you see any broken glass?”

Results show verb used in original question influenced whether they “saw” glass or not.

Question 64

Loftus & Palmer conclusion

Answer 64

Argue that 2 kinds of info go into a persons memory of an event:
1. Perception of event (witnessing accident).
2. Info supplied after event (leading questions).

Over time info of these 2 can be interpreted to produce the one reconstructed memory.

Question 65

Eyewitness testimony: Misleading information - Post-event discussion

Answer 65

Post event discussion: when co witnesses discuss the event with each other contaminating their testimonies. They combine the (mis)info from another witness with their own memories.

Question 66

Explanations of Post-event discussion

Answer 66

1. Source monitoring theory: memories of event are genuinely distorted. Witness can recall info of event but cant remember where it came from (their own or someone else).
   source confusion.
2. Conformity theory: witness testimony isn’t distorted but recall appears to change because they go along with others accounts to win social approval or because they believe others are correct.

Question 67

Post-event discussion: Gabbert et al (2003)

Answer 67

-2 groups of paired ppts.
-each pair watched video of same crime from different POVS & discussed what they saw while the other group had no discussion.
-both gave testimonies.

71% of ppts in discussion group mistakenly recalled aspects they didn’t see.
Control group had 0%.
conformity theory memory

Question 68

Strength of misleading info: Loftus (1975)

Answer 68

-Misleading info has important practical uses in criminal justice system.
Consequences of inaccurate EWT can be serious. Police officers have to be careful about their phrasing of questions when interviewing witnesses.
-Psychologists can improve legal system by protecting innocents from faulty convictions.

Counterpoint: witnessing a real life crime is different to research issues. Foster et all (1984) says ppts are less motivated to be accurate within experiment.
Suggests researchers such as Loftus are too pessimistic about effects of misleading info & EWT may be more dependable than research suggests.

Question 69

Limitation of misleading info: Sutherland & Hayne (2001)

Answer 69

-Showed ppts a video.
-Recall was more accurate for central details of event than peripheral ones.
-Ppts focussed on central features and those memories were resistant or misleading info.

Suggests original memories for central details were not distorted & survived.

Question 70

Limitation for misleading info: Skagerberg & Wright (2008)

Answer 70

-Showed ppts film clips with 2 versions. -1 with mugger’s dark brown hair and 1 with mugger’s light brown hair.
-Ppts discussed clips and came to conclusion of “medium brown” hair.

Suggests memory itself isn’t distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than the result of memory conformity.

Question 71

Limitation of misleading info: Zaragoza & McCloskey (1989)

Answer 71

-Argue that many answers given in oag studies are due to deman characteristics.
-Ppts don’t want to let researcher down so they guess when asked question they don’t know answer to.

Question 72

Eyewitness testimony: Anxiety

Answer 72

Anxiety: unpleasant, emotional state where we fear something bad will happen, typically when in stressful situations. (heart rate increases, shallow breathing etc).

Stress may have an adverse effect on how well we encode memory.

Question 73

Anxiety’s negative effect: Weapon focus

Answer 73

-Presence of gun causes anxiety & is therefore the main focus.
-The result of this is tunnel vision (focus on weapon so other details are peripheral).
-Memory of event will be centralised.

Question 74

Weapon focus: Johnson & Scott (1976)

Answer 74

Ppts exposed to one of two situations:
1. Overheard discussion about equipment failure & person came out lag holding a pen with grease on hands.
2. Overheard heated exchange with sounds of breaking glass & person comes out with bloodstained knife.

Ppts given 50 photos to identify person:
1. Pen man identified 49% of the time.
2. Knife man identified only 33% of the time.

Shows witness fixates on weapon rather than perpetrators appearance.

Question 75

Limitation of weapon focus: Pickel (1998)

Answer 75

To investigate whether incapacity to recall details on incident is due to unusualness or the threat the object poses.

-230 ppts shown video of man entering hairdressers.
-man was holding either scissors, handgun, wallet, raw chicken, nothing.
-ppts completed questionnaire about details of the man & receptionist.
-varied unusualness & threat.

Raw chicken: 7.21
Scissors: 8.14
Handgun: 7.83

Suggests weapon focus effect is due to unusualness.

Question 76

Strength of weapon focus: Valentine & Mesout (2009)

Answer 76

-Carried out study in London dungeon.
-Assessed anxiety with heart rate monitors & 2 groups.
-1 with high anxiety & 1 with low anxiety.

17% of high anxiety group identified actor correct.
75% of low anxiety group identified actor correct.

Shows high level anxiety does have negative effect on immediate eyewitness recall of stressful event.

Question 77

Anxiety’s positive effect: Yuille & Cutshall (1986)

Answer 77

Watching real crime increases accurate memory due to fight or flight being triggered increasing alertness.
Wanted to see if misleading info would impact memory of real events.

-13 witnesses partaken in study.
-shopkeeper shot boy stealing gun 6 times & got shot too.
-witnesses interviewed 5 months later with 2 misleading questions.

Highest stress levels had best recall 88% compared to lower levels 75%.

Question 78

Strength for anxiety’s positive effect: Christiansen & Hubinette (1993)

Answer 78

-interviewed 58 witnesses to actual bank robberies (some directly involved) .
-found that recall was more than 75% accurate across all witnesses & even more for the ones most stressed (directly involved).

Anxiety doesn’t reduce accuracy of recall & might even enhance it.

Counterpoint: lack of control over confounding variables & there may have been post event discussions.

Question 79

Yerkes-Dodson law (1908) & Deffenbacker (1983)

Answer 79

Reviewed 21 studies of EWT.
Yerkes-Dodson law suggests that when we witness a crime we become emotionally & physically aroused & experience physiological changes. When level of anxiety increases, so does recall accuracy until a certain point. If optimum anxiety is exceeded, then recall declines.

Question 80

Limitation of inverted - U theory

Answer 80

-Ignores that anxiety has many elements: cognitive, behavioural, emotional & physical.
-Focused on physical & assumes that’s the only aspect linked to EWT. But cognitive thinking is also important.

Question 81

Improving EWT: Cognitive interview (CI)

Answer 81

Technique used by police to interview witnesses to a crime so they can recall original context of an event.

schema - original idea without any influence.

Question 82

Cognitive interview: Fisherman & Gieselman (1992)

Answer 82

Found that people remember things better if provided retrieval cues.

4 CI techniques;
-report everything- every trivial detail to act as cues.
-reinstatement of context- witness should return to original crime scene “in their mind” & imagine environment & emotions. context dependant cues.
-change of order- perhaps reversing, to prevent people reporting expectations rather than actuality & prevents dishonesty.
-change perspective- have to think harder.

Question 83

Cognitive interview: Why is it effective?

Answer 83

1. Retrieval failure theory: free recall allows ppts to gain cues & picture event.
2. Influence of leading questions: CI helps obtain maximum recall of accurate info as they aren’t changing answers based on prompts.

Question 84

Cognitive interview: Enhanced cognitive interview (ECI)

Answer 84

Fisher (1987) developed additional elements of CI to focus on dynamics of the interactions.
E.g. Interviewer needs to know when to establish & relinquish eye contact.

Also includes reducing anxiety, minimal distractions, open ended questions etc.

Question 85

Strength of CI: Kohnken et al (1999)

Answer 85

-Meta analysis comvined data from 55 studies comparing CI & ECI. CI gave average 41% increase in accurate info compared to standard interview.
-Only 4/55 studies showed no diff in interviews.

Shows that CI is effective in helping witness recall info.

Counterpoint: Köhnken also found increase in inaccurate info recalled. More so in ECI. Shows that CI interviews may sacrifice quality of EWT (accuracy) for quantity (amount).

Question 86

Limitation of CI: Milne & Bull (2002)

Answer 86

Found that each of 4 techniques used alone produce more info than standard interview, but also found a combination of report everything & reinstate the context produced better recall than any other elements or combo of elements.

Casts doubt on credibility of overall CI as perhaps not all elements are equally useful/effective.

Question 87

Limitation of CI: Kebbell & Wagstaff (1997) - Time-consuming

Answer 87

May be reluctant to use this as it can take hours. Including time needed to establish rapport & allow witness to relax. CI also requires special training and many forces may not have resources to provide more than a few hours.

Suggests it’s unrealistic method to use the complete CI.

Question 88

Strength of CI: Likelihood of falling for LQ

Answer 88

Students were shown staged situation where intruder wearing blue entered a class and stole projector.

Asked:
“Was the guy with the green ruc sack nervous?”
“What colour was the guys ruck sack?”

Those questioned with CI were less likely to fall for leading questions.