factors affecting the accuracy of EWT

Question 1

what is misleading information and what are the two types

Answer 1

before an eyewitness is asked to recall what happened they are exposed to incorrect information

• leading questions
• post-event discussion

Question 2

what are leading questions

Answer 2

• questions which prompt or encourage an answer that is wanted by the person asking the question

Question 3

outline Loftus and Palmer’s study

Answer 3

experiment 1:
- watched videos of traffic accidents
- asked how fast the cars were going
- 5 word variations of different intensities
- found smashed was highest (40.8mph) estimate and contacted was lowest (31.8mph)

experiment 2:
- 1 min film ending in car accident
- 3 conditions - 1. how fast + smashed, 2. how fast + bumped, 3. no speed question
- 1 week later were asked questions including did you see any broken glass
- found smashed condition had highest in accurate recall of witnessing broken glass

Question 4

strengths of misleading information

Answer 4

• practical application = cognitive interview, avoid leading Qs + asked to report everything
• high control in lab setting = high internal validity + high replicability and reliability

Question 5

what is post-event discussion

Answer 5

witnesses of the same event discuss the details of a crime after it has occurred

Question 6

outline Gabbert et al

Answer 6

• recall of events with 2 conditions - individual questionnaire or co-witness questionnaire
• co-witness = 71% reported information gathered from the other witness + 60% reported she was guilty of a crime despite not having witnessed this themselves

Question 7

weaknesses of misleading information

Answer 7

• artificial studies - not representative of the complexities of real eye-witness such as anxiety = lacks ecological validity
• Loftus + Palmer lacks population validity = university students + less insightful with driving as little experience

Question 8

what is weapon focus

Answer 8

the concentration of a witnesses’s attention on a weapon, which results in reducing their ability to remember other details of the crime

Question 9

outline + evaluate Johnson and Scott’s study

Answer 9

2 conditions:
- low anxiety = overheard discussion about some equipment not working and saw a man leave holding a pen and with grease on his hands
- 49% accurate identification
- high anxiety = overhear heated argument followed by the sound of glass breaking and crashing chairs and saw a man leave with a bloody knife
- 33% accurate identification

• ethical issues = deception, psychological harm, lack of informed consent, lacked right to withdraw

Question 10

how can anxiety have a negative or positive effect on accuracy of EWT

Answer 10

• negative = narrowed focus
• positive = high alertness

Question 11

outline and evaluate Yuille and Cutshall’s study

Answer 11

• theft, thief shot owner and owner shot thief
• 21 witnesses all took part in police interviews and then 4-5 months later13 took part in study interview
• comparison across both interviews showed high levels of accuracy especially from those who were most distressed at the time (93%) vs (75% for others)
• high ecological validity = real-life crime so can be generalised widely
• lack of control = could be influenced by post-event discussion or other extraneous variables e.g. proximity to crime, therefore cause and effect is hard to establish