Module 2- Memory (EWT)

Question 1

What is eyewitness testimony?

Answer 1

• the evidence supplied to a court by people who have seen a crime, based on their memory of the incident.
• juries are often heavily influenced by eyewitnesses

Question 2

What are some examples of eyewitness testimony?

Answer 2

Identification of perpetrator, details of crime (sequence of events, time of day)

Question 3

What are leading questions?

Answer 3

questions that are phrased in a way that encourages a witness to give a certain answer

Question 4

What does the response- bias explanation argue?

Answer 4

leading questions do not affect memory, just the answer a person chooses to give.

Question 5

What does the substitution- bias explanation argue?

Answer 5

leading questions distort memories because they contain misleading information

Question 6

Who performed the leading questions experiment?

Answer 6

Loftus and Palmer (1974)

Question 7

Procedure of the Leading Questions experiment:

Answer 7

• Loftus and Palmer (1974):
• showed 45 American students a film of car crash and asked to estimate speed of cars when they crashed.
• However different verbs were used in question depending on the condition. Verbs= contacted, hit, bumped, collided, smashed

Question 8

Findings of Leading Questions experiment:

Answer 8

• ‘contacted’ condition estimated speed= 31mph
• ‘smashed’ condition estimated speed = 41mph

-1 week later participants asked if they saw broken glass (was no broken glass shown in the film)
- ‘smashed’ condition,
32% = saw broken glass
-control condition = 12% saw broken glass
- Shows leading questions have significant impact on what people recall and can change a person’s entire memory of an event.

Question 9

Evaluation of Leading questions (strengths)

Answer 9

+ reliable, high validity = lab experiment, highly controlled, easy to replicate, reduces chance of extraneous variables,

Question 10

Evaluation of Leading Questions (Weaknesses)

Answer 10

• questionable ecological validity- watched car crash, real car crash witnesses have stronger emotional connection to event and may not be as susceptible to leading questions
• lacks population validity, unable to generalise findings to other populations, 45 American students, students may be less experienced drivers (less able to estimate speeds than older drivers)

Question 11

What is post-event discussion?

Answer 11

• Memory contamination - memory of event can be contaminated through discussion of events with others due to misinformation.
• Memory conformity- desire for social approval can lead co-witnesses to reach a consensus view of what happened

Question 12

Procedure of Post-event discussion

Answer 12

Gabbert et al. (2003):

• put participants in pairs and made to watch different videos of same event, so they each got unique details.
• One condition- the pairs encouraged to discuss event with each other before individually recalling the event.
• Other condition= did not discuss event with each other.

Question 13

Findings of Post event discussion

Answer 13

-witnesses who discussed event= 71% recalled details that they could not have seen themselves inaccurately, but had learned of during discussion with their partner.

Question 14

Evaluation of Post event discussion:

Answer 14

+ Population validity= 2 different populations, (students and older adults) were compared and found no significant differences between groups.

Allows us to conclude post-event discussion affects younger and older adults in a similar way.

• Lacks ecological validity- Participants knew they were in an experiment and therefore are more likely to have paid close attention to details of video clip.
  The results do not reflect real life where witnesses may be exposed to less information.

Question 15

What is anxiety?

Answer 15

Anxiety is a state of apprehension, uncertainty, and fear resulting from a threatening situation.

Question 16

What happens when anxiety is high?

Answer 16

• Can often impair physical and psychological functioning.
• Several psychologists suggested anxiety that occurs when witnessing a crime can prevent accurate and detailed recall of that crime.

Question 17

What is the weapon focus effect?

Answer 17

• Presence of weapon during a crime increases anxiety and therefore could impair witnesses’ memory of the crime.
• People who observe a violent crime will often pay attention to the most threatening aspect of the situation, due to the anxiety the weapons cause.
• Means witnesses who see a violent crime involving a weapon can often describe a criminal’s weapon in great detail, but they cannot recall much about the criminal themselves. This is called the weapon focus effect.

Question 18

Procedure of the anxiety experiment

Answer 18

Loftus (1979): investigated whether anxiety affected a person’s ability to recognise the perpetrator of a crime.
-Experimental condition= Arranged for participants to overhear a heated, hostile argument between 2 people. Heard the sounds of furniture being overturned and broken glass. Then a man emerged carrying a letter opener covered in blood.

• Control condition participants overheard conversation between 2 people about laboratory equipment failure before a man with grease all over his hands emerged carrying a pen.
• Participants then asked to identify person they had just seen from 50 photos.

Question 19

Findings of the Anxiety experiment:

Answer 19

• 33% of participants in bloody letter opener condition recognised man holding letter opener in photos
• 49% of participants in pen condition recognised the photo of the man carrying the pen.
• Loftus (1979) argued this occurred as people in former condition focused on the bloody letter opener rather than the person carrying it, as letter opener could pose threat to them

Question 20

Evaluation of the anxiety experiment (strengths):

Answer 20

+ Study supported by other studies:
Loftus & Burns (1982) allocated participants into one of two conditions. One group watched a violent short film of boy was shot in head. Other group watched non-violent short film of a crime. Participants less accurate in recall when they saw the short film with gun than those who watched non-violent movie.

Question 21

Evaluation of anxiety experiment (weaknesses):

Answer 21

• Lacks ecological validity= Although waiting in reception outside of lab, may have anticipated that something was going to happen. Could have affected accuracy of judgements and the validity of the study. (Demand characteristics)
• Violated ethical guidelines= Deception (nature of experiment), psychological harm ( exposed to a man who they believed killed someone, holding bloodied knife - possible extreme distress (esp if they or someone they knew had been involved in knife crime)
• Yuille and Cutshall (1986) investigated effect of anxiety in real life shooting, where one person was killed and another seriously wounded.
  21 witnesses originally interviewed by police and 13 witnesses (ages 15-32) agreed to participate in follow-up interview 5 months later. Witnesses accurate in eyewitness accounts, little change found in their testimony. Witnesses avoided leading questions, and those who were most distressed at shooting gave most accurate account.
  —> Irl leading questions and anxiety don’t affect accuracy of eyewitness testimony same way they do in lab
• Individual differences in how anxiety affects memory, some have better recall when anxious.

Christianson and Hubinette (1983) conducted research study using 110 real life eyewitnesses who witnessed 1 of 22 bank robberies. Some onlookers and some bank clerks who were directly threatened by robbers. Found victims more accurate than onlookers in description of bank robbers ( more anxiety)

Question 22

What did Fisher et al argue about standard interviews?

Answer 22

Fisher et al. (1987):

• studied real police interviews over a 4months
• found questions were brief, direct, fact based and closed.
• Witnesses often interrupted and not allowed to expand on answers. (standard interview)
• Fisher et al. (1987) argued that this may be contributing to failure of eyewitnesses to accurately recall the event they witnessed.

Question 23

Who developed the cognitive interview and why?

Answer 23

• Geiselman et al. (1985)

- to improve police interview techniques and obtain more accurate information from eyewitnesses.

Question 24

What is the cognitive interview (stages)?

Answer 24

1. Context Reinstatement = Witness tries to mentally recreate image of situation (details of the environment- weather, emotional state -feelings at time of incident. - may act as retrieval cues (context-dependent cues) to improve recall.
2. Report Everything = interviewer encourages witness to recall all details about the event, even seemingly unimportant ones -may highlight details which have been overlooked and trigger other memories.
3. Recall From Changed Perspective = witness tries to mentally recreate situation from different POVs, e.g. another witness, victim - Promotes more holistic view of event which may enhance recall and reduce influence of schemas. (Schemas are mental structures of preconceived ideas)
4. Recall in Reverse Order = witness asked to recall scene in a different chronological order, e.g. backwards. - should verify accuracy of witnesses’ account and reduce possibility recall may be influenced by schemas/expectations.

Question 25

What is the enhanced cognitive interview?

Answer 25

Fischer added guidelines for police interviews:

• Encourage witness to relax and speak slowly (reduces anxiety and may enhance recall).
• Avoid distractions.
• Use open-ended questions.

-Offer comments to help clarify witness statements (may improve detail
of the statement).

Question 26

Evaluation of Cognitive Interview (strengths)

Answer 26

+ Geiselman et al. (1985) showed participants video of simulated crime and tested recall using cognitive interview, standard interview or hypnosis. The cognitive interview = most info recalled by eyewitnesses.

+ Fisher et al. (1990) trained real police officers in Miami to use enhanced cognitive interview when interviewing eyewitnesses. Found on average , 46% increase in amount of info witnesses gave. 90% of the info that could be verified was accurate.

Question 27

Evaluation of Cognitive Interview (weaknesses):

Answer 27

• Koehnken et al. (1999) found witnesses recalled more incorrect info when interviewed with cognitive interview than standard interview, perhaps as detailed recall increases chance mistakes
• The cognitive interview is time consuming to implement , police officers often do not have the time, training and resources to use it.
• Memon et al. (1993) reported police officers believed Recall From Changed Perspective stage of cognitive interview misleads witnesses into speculating about the event, rather than reporting what they actually saw. -> For this reason the police were reluctant to use it.