Criminal Flashcards
(136 cards)
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - aims
To investigate whether memory could be affected by post-event information, specifically leading questions
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - first experiment - procedure
Opportunity sample of 45 students were shown traffic accident footage (from safety films for drivers) that ranged from 5-30 seconds long. Participants were divided into five groups and asked the critical question ‘about how fast were the cars going when they - into each other’ with the gap being filled by one of five verbs (smashed, collided, bumped, hit and contacted). Mean speed estimates were then measured
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - first experiment - findings
Smashed had the highest mean speed at 40.5 mph, 9.7mph than contacted which had the lowest
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - first experiment - conclusion
That post-event information can influence the recall of that event, however a question remained over whether it actually changed the memory or just biased the response. This led to the second experiment
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - second experiment - procedure
150 participants were shown a one minute film, which included a short scene of a car accident. Three groups, one asked how fast when the cars ‘smashed’, another ‘hit’ and the other was not asked to estimate speed. A week later the participants were asked back and given questions about their recall of the clip, including ‘did you see any broken glass?’
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - second experiment - findings
The participants in the ‘smashed’ condition gave the highest estimates of speed and were most likely to report broken glass (there was none). 16 reported it in the ‘smashed’, 7 in the ‘hit’ and 6 in the control
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - second experiment - conclusion
The findings suggested that post-event information did not simply elicit a response bias but actually changed the memory of the event.
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - strengths
Well controlled procedure - lab study, only thing changed was critical question, same questionnaire and video
Application to changes in the legal system - the Devlin report was introduced to reccommend that EWT was not solely used to convict
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - strengths
Well controlled procedure - only change the participants experienced was the wording of he critical question. High internal validity as extraneous variables are reduced.
Application to changes in the legal system - Devlin report was published in 1976, recommending that juries should not convict solely from an eye witness testimony
Loftus and Palmer (1974) - weaknesses
Low ecological validity - watching a video of a car crash is very different from actually seeing one (paying full attention, less emotional response)
Sampling issues - all were college students, level of education may affect results, also all young so may not have experience driving.
Contradictory evidence - Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
Interviewed witnesses to a real life shooting in Canada, thirteen witnesses were reinterviewed by the researchers four to five months later. They gave accurate accounts of the event even though the researchers deliberately included two leading questions
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour
Labelling
Self-fulfilling prophecy
Social learning
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - social learning
Criminal behaviour is learnt through the observation and imitation of others. To learn the behaviour it must be attended to, recalled and the would be offender must have the skill to perform it successfully. They must also be motivated to reproduce the behaviour, this could be due to vicarious reinforcement
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - social learning - strengths
Anderson and Gill (2000)
Harris and Klebold (1999)
Anderson and Gill (2000)
Participants who played violent video games were more likely to administer a loud and prolonged blast of noise to an opponent than those that played non-violent video games
Harris and Klebold (1999)
There is evidence to suggest that the people responsible for the Columbine high school massacre were influenced by violent films and video games (natural born killers)
Social explanations for crime and ant-social behaviour - weaknesses
Hard to test as it is unethical to make people commit crimes, therefore most research is due to case studies or generalised.
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - self-fulfilling prophecy
The idea that labels influence future behaviour. Labels would change the way that others treat an individual, leading to that individual internalising the label, eventually becoming ‘real’ as it influences the way that they act. This can be applied to the criminal label ‘deviant’, as they are treated differently and isolated from society, they would socialise more with deviant groups that feel the same way, confirming their label.
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - self-fulfilling prophecy - strengths
Jahoda (1954)
Rosenthal and Jacobsen (1968)
Jahoda (1954)
Studied the Ashanti of Ghana where they boys are named after the day that they are born. Monday boys (Kwadwo) were thought to be more even tempered than the Wednesday boys (Kwadku). Jahoda observed that the Kwadku were over three times more likely to be involved in violent crime than the Kwadwo over a five year period
Rosenthal and Jacobsen (1968)
Teachers at a primary school were told that a group of children were ‘spurters’ and were about to ‘bloom’ (they were chosen at random). At the end of the school year those children showed significant improvements in IQ than the children labelled as ‘standard’
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - self-fulfilling prophecy - weaknesses
Zebrowitz et al (1998)
There is not much evidence applying directly to crime, most of it is generalised. It is only assumed that it will work
Zebrowitz et al (1998)
Boys with a ‘baby face’ were more likely to be involved in crime, suggesting that they were overcompensating for appearing ‘weak’ or ‘childlike’ rather than living up to that label
Social explanations for crime and anti-social behaviour - labelling
A theory of how we classify ourselves and others using labels, which then define that person. For example, if a person is labelled deviant, it would come to define them affecting how people behave towards them.
Becker (1963)