Memory : EWT and Misleading Information

Question 1

What is eyewitness testimony?

Answer 1

The ability of people to remember the details of event such as accidents and crimes which they themselves have observed.

Question 2

What are two factors that affect accuracy of EWT?

Answer 2

Misleading questions

Anxiety

Question 3

What is misleading information ?

Answer 3

Incorrect information given to the eye witness usually after the event. It can take many forms such as leading questions and post event discussion

Question 4

What is a leading question ?

Answer 4

A question which because of the way it is phrased suggests a certain answer

Question 5

What is one study that look in on the effects of leading questions on EWT ?

Answer 5

Lotus and palmer (1974)

Question 6

What was the aim of Loftus and palmers (1974) study ?

Answer 6

To examine the effects of misleading information on EWT

Question 7

What was the procedure of loftus and palmers (1974) study ?

Answer 7

Showed 45 students 7 films of different car accidents,
Then gave them a questionnaire after each film
On questionnaire
They were asked a critical leading question
of ‘how fast were the cars going when they hit each other ?’
However the verb in the question could either be
Hit, contacted, bumped,collided,smashed

Question 8

What were the results of the loftus and palmer study ?

Answer 8

Mean estimated speed for smashed was was 40.5 whilst for contacted was 31.8 mph.

Question 9

What was the conclusion of loftus and palmers study ?

Answer 9

Demonstrates the response bias explanation as when participants gets leading question using the word smashed they chose higher speed estimate.

Shows that wording of question has no real influence on memory but does on how participants answer question

Question 10

What was the aim of loftus and and palmers 2nd study ?

Answer 10

To examine the effect of misleading information on EWT

Question 11

What was the procedure of Loftus and palmers 2nd study ?

Answer 11

3 group of 50 participants viewed video of car accident

Then given questionnaire and asked how fast were cars going with they smashed into each other

Verb that makes this leading question was changed for each group.
Group 1 had hit, group 2 had smashed and 3 had no leading question at all
A week later participants were asked ‘did you see any broken glass’ even though there wasn’t any

Question 12

What was the results of loftus and palmers second study ?

Answer 12

Those who thought car was travelling faster (smashed group) were more likely to report seeing broken glass

Question 13

What was the conclusion of the experiment ?

Answer 13

Demonstrates the substitution explanation
That
The wording of a question can actually change participants memory as shown in experiment

Question 14

What is post event discussion

Answer 14

When there is more than one witness to an event so witnesses may discuss what they have seen with co witnesses or with other people. This may influence the accuracy of each witness’s recall of event

Question 15

What is one study that looks into the effects of post event discussion ?

Answer 15

Gabbert et al (2003)

Question 16

What was the procedure of gabbert et al study ?

Answer 16

Showed pair of participants a different video of same event
so each participant viewed unique events
Pairs in one condition , encouraged to discuss the event before individually recalling

Question 17

What were the results of gabbert et als study ?

Answer 17

71% of witnesses who discussed event went on to mistakenly recall items from discussion
0% did this in control group

Question 18

What was the conclusion of gabbert et al experiment ?

Answer 18

Witnesses often go along with each other because they believe other witnesses are right and they are wrong
Memory conformity

Question 19

Explain a strength of research into misleading information peel (practical)

Answer 19

A strength is
Research into misleading information on EWT has useful real life applications

For example research on this has been used to warn the justice system of problems with eye witness identification as it can lead to conviction of innocent people

Research into the effects of misleading info has made a positive difference in real life such as improving law system

Question 20

A limitation of research into misleading information

Artificial

Answer 20

A limitation of lab experiments such loftus and palmers research
tell us very little about how leading questions affect EWT in real life

Example in the study participants watched film clips of ca accidents.
This is very different from witnessing real life accident
Lack of stress and consequence

Study cant be generalised to real life
Lack of external validity

Question 21

What is a limitation of research into the effects of misleading information on EWT? (Demand characteristics)

Answer 21

A limitation of research
Many participants performed as a result of demand characteristics

For example zargosa and mccloskey argued that participants answered in a way to appear more helpful and attentive
So would usually answer questions they didn’t know with yes even if event didn’t happen.

This shows that research does not show the true effect of misleading formation on EWT
Reducing internal validity