Week 1

Question 1

What is Investigative Psychology?

Answer 1

Investigative Psychology is the application of psychological principles and research to the investigation of crime.

Question 2

Treating memory like a crime scene

Answer 2

Justice system must optimise ‘system variables’ (Wells, 1979) to:
-enhance the completeness and accuracy of the complainant’s account

Memory is not like a video recording! Events are reconstructed using stored memory and our knowledge about the world

Question 3

Overview:

witness reports

proivde major leads in an investigation how often?

Answer 3

36% ‘always’ or almost always’

51% ‘usually’ (Kebbell & Milne, 1998)

Question 4

Estimator variables

Answer 4

Estimator variables are external factors that influence eyewitness testimony and how accurate the recollection of the events are. Estimator variables cannot be controlled by others.

Examples are how good the witness’ vision is, how close the witness was to the event, and how clear the weather and visual conditions were on that day. These variables are influential to the testimony of the witness and cannot be controlled by legal professionals.

Question 5

System variables

Answer 5

Things that forensic investigators can influence.

Examples of system variables include how and when a police lineup is arranged and instructions given to the witness.

Variables controlled within an actual court case are system variables (Wells, Memon, & Penrod, 2006). System variables are divided into two categories; interviewing eyewitnesses and identification of suspects. Interviewing eyewitnesses is the process that involves recall memory and identification of suspects involves recognition memory (Wells et al., 2006).

System variable research has focused primarily on four factors, namely the instructions to eyewitnesses, the content of a lineup, the presentation procedures used during the lineup, and the behaviors of the lineup administrator.

Question 6

The importance of eyewitnesses

Answer 6

D.N.A. testing and other research indicates that inaccurate eyewitness evidence is the major factor responsible for false convictions (Huff, Rattner and Sagarin, 1996).

Question 7

Memory Processes

Answer 7

Human memory is not like a video camera (Cutler and Penrod, 1995)

Basket-ball example (selective attention/invisible gorrilla)

For a memory to recalled it must go through three stages:

encoding
storage
retrieval

Question 8

Encoding

Answer 8

The process of storing or representing information in memory

Depends on where attention is perceived

We cannot take in all the information in our environment

Information to which we do not actively attend is rarely encoded

Example: Daniel Morcombe case

Question 9

Storage

Answer 9

As we do not encode everything we have gaps in our memory

We may “fill-in” the gaps to fit in with our attitudes, beliefs and expectations

External sources may be incorporated into memory (e.g., told someone had a moustache)

Often unable to distinguish the source of memories (source amnesia)

Example: Newcastle shooting

Question 10

Retrieval

Answer 10

We cannot claim to have successfully remembered material unless we have recalled it

Retrieval cues are important here

eg. Joke endings
Security guard (?)

Example: Try to recall as many words as possible from the cue _ _ _ _ I _ _

vs cue:
Now try to recall as many words as possible from the cue _ _ _ _ I N G

Question 11

Recognition versus Recall

Answer 11

Recall- when we have to call something up cold

Recognition- when the information to be remembered is presented to us and we have to decide whether we have seen it before

Question 12

Identification accuracy

Answer 12

Dwayne Scruggs sentenced to 40 years for rape (served 7.5) based on victim id and the similarity of his boots.

Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., & McEwen, T. (1996). Convicted
by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA
evidence to establish innocence after trial. Washington, DC: References U.S. Department of Justice.

Question 13

Line Ups:

Four recommended rules (Wells, Small, Penrod, Malpas, Fulero, & Brimacombe, 1998)

Rule 1

Answer 13

Rule 1: Who conducts the lineup

The person who conducts the lineup should not be aware of which member of the lineup or photospread is the suspect

Lineup as experiment analogy

Clever Hans, rat mazes

State v’s Washington

Prevents feedback

Question 14

LINE UPS
Four recommended rules

Rule 2

Answer 14

Eyewitnesses should be told explicitly that the person in question might not be in the lineup or photospread and therefore should not feel that they must make an identification.

They should also be told that the person administering the lineup does not know which person is the suspect in the case.

Question 15

Four recommended rules 
rule 2 contd?
less likely to...
encourages?
Selective effect?
prevents..?

Answer 15

Less likely to make a false id if they know the offender may not be there (Malpass & Devine, 1981)

Encourages not to make a relative judgement

Selective effect- no appreciable reduction in culprit present lineups (Steblay, 1997)

Prevents witnesses from looking for cues

Question 16

Lineup Rule Recomendations

Rule 3 Structure of the lineup or photospread

Answer 16

The suspect should not stand out in the lineup or photospread as being different from the distractors based on the eyewitness’s previous description of the culprit or based on other factors that would draw extra attention to the suspect.

Question 17

line up rule recommendations
rule 3 part 2: godamnit I hate mylife

important that?
show ups are?
can be tested using?
distractors should not…?

Answer 17

Important that the research hypothesis is not conveyed to the participant (e.g., if only the suspect has the described clothes)

Show-ups not acceptable

Can be tested using a mock-witness procedure (Malpas, 1981)

Selecting distractors that look like the suspect is not desirable as you eventually could end up with clones

Question 18

Line ups Rule 3 continued:

Misfit between…

unique non-described….

Answer 18

Misfit between suspect and description:

• -E.g. if evidence suggests someone else
• –Default to the suspect description

Unique non-described features of the suspect
—-Does not matter unless he stands out in such a way as to appear guilty

Question 19

Four recommended rules

Rule 3 Continued again FUCK

Answer 19

Common non-described features

E.g., default to clean shaven if not mentioned

If description is so unique, e.g., scar or tattoo then a lineup may not be necessary

Question 20

Line-ups:
RULE 4
Obtaining Confidence Judgements

Answer 20

A clear statement should be taken from the eyewitness at the time of the identification and prior to any feedback as to his or her confidence that the identified person is the actual culprit.

Question 21

Rule 4: confidence judgements

continued

Answer 21

Confidence is a powerful factor in determining accuracy

Confidence may increase due to post-event factors

Require a record

Question 22

What do you want from an eyewitness?

Answer 22

Kebbell & Wagstaff (1998) state it is to:

Identify offence
Identify offender
Remove inappropriate defence

Question 23

Accuracy of eyewitness accounts

Answer 23

Factors concerning the crime- can be remembered from the mnemonic “ADVOKATE”

Question 24

(A)dvokate

Amount of…

Answer 24

Amount of time under observation

Alexander & Lane (1971) presented slides for 10 s or 32 s. Correct identifications were made 47% of the time with the short exposure and 58% of the time with the longer exposure

Question 25

a(D)vokate how far?

Answer 25

Distance The further away the more difficult to remember details. Wagenaar & van der Schrier (1994) found identifications became more dubious when the distance between the witness and target was over 15 m

Question 26

ad(V)okate can you see it?

Answer 26

The time of day and quality of streetlighting will also have an impact. Wagenaar & van der Schrier (1994) found identification was often inaccurate at light levels of less than 5 lux.

Question 27

adv(O)kate | whats in the way?

Answer 27

Obstructions If something obstructs the witness’s view, it will prevent the witness seeing, encoding and retrieving the information Wells & Murray (1983) showed a 5 min video with the target occluded for 20, 50, or 80% of the time Estimates of the occlusion were 10.6%, 21.3%, and 53.5% respectively

Question 28

advo(K)ate do I know you?

Answer 28

Known or seen before If a witness has previously seen an offender he or she will be more able to provide details Bruce (1982) showed familiar and unfamiliar pictures. Accuracy rate was 95% for familiar and 55% for unfamiliar

Question 29

advok(A)te why remember?

Answer 29

Any reason to remember We are more likely to remember memorable information. Pezdek & Prull (1993 found that recognition memory for sexually explicit content is better than memory for nonexplicit content, and that this difference is more pronounced when the utterance is contextually incongruous “I can’t keep my eyes off your sensuous moist lips” More likely to be remembered in an office situation than a bar situation

Question 30

advoka(T)e delay vs accuracy

Answer 30

Time lapse The longer the delay the less complete and accurate the memory will be Ebbinghaus (1885) memory of nonsense symbols

Question 31

advokat(E) material discrepancies

Answer 31

Errors or material discrepancies Not always the case. For example, Wells & Leippe (1981) found that accuracy of peripheral information not related to accuracy of identification

Question 32

advokate V violence/presence of a weapon

Answer 32

Violence and presence of a weapon The more intense something is the more likely it is to have an impact on us and we are to remember it Keep recalling the event (Christianson, 1992) “Weapon focus” When a weapon is used the witness is likely to focus on that weapon to the detriment of their memory for other factors

Question 33

Accuracy of eyewitness accounts What did loftus, loftus & messo find in 1987?

Answer 33

person approached bank clerk with either a cheque book or a gun more eye movements directed to the gun

Question 34

Describing other aspects of the offence (sanders& chiu) actions vs what?

Answer 34

actions vs descriptions Sanders & Chiu (1988) staged even of a man slashing a piece of paper with a razor. Few errors concerning his actions

Question 35

Accuracy of eyewitness accounts earwitness evidence

Answer 35

“Earwitness” evidence Witnesses are poor at remembering the exact words but are good at remembering the gist Identification of someone’s voice from a selection of others can be good but not as high as normal identifications. Yarmey, Yarmey and Yarmey (1994) found an accuracy rate of 46% for id but 9% by ear

Question 36

The characteristics of the witness Children

Answer 36

Relationship between age and ability to recall is not straightforward, can be very variable List (1986) showed 10 year olds and adults a video. Children’s accuracy was 73% while adults was 84% although both groups remembered the central details Children are very sensitive to the way in which they are interviewed

Question 37

The characteristics of the witness Older adults

Answer 37

As we age our perceptual abilities decrease. By 80 our visual acuity is half that of a young person By 30 most can’t hear above 15000Hz by 50 this is 12000 Hz Coxon & Valentine (1997) found for a stimuli video accuracy of 88% for 16-19 and 78% for the older group (60-85)

Question 38

The characteristics of the witness Witnesses with learning disabilities

Answer 38

This group may be poorer at encoding, storage and retrieval (Kebbell & Hatton, 1999). Heavily influenced by the questions they are asked. Tend to remember the important details

Question 39

The characteristics of the witness Mental illness (e.g., depression, schizophrenia)

Answer 39

Little research Schizophrenia --may confuse hallucinations, errors of perception Depression-- may not pay attention or lack the motivation to rehearse what they have witnessed

Question 40

The characteristics of the witness Alcohol

Answer 40

-Greater alcohol consumption = greater memory impairment Yuille & Tollestrup (1990) interviewed 120 participant witnesses. One given a alcohol level of 0.10ml another no alcohol. No alcohol recalled over 20% more information and this information was more accurate. Interestingly no impact on recognition accuracy a week later

Question 41

The characteristics of the witness Other DRUGS

Answer 41

Typically poorly researched Varies due to dosage, administration, physical characteristics of the individual If alters perception it is likely to alter memory. For instance, cannabis can create distortions of time and space and so memories for these attributes can be poor Rule of thumb, the greater the distortion in perception the greater the memory distortion

Question 42

The characteristics of the witness Head injury

Answer 42

Blows that result in unconsciousness usually lead to memory problems At first “retrograde amnesia” Blank period usually decreases over time so only the final few moments before the blow was delivered are forgotten Final few moments normally not recovered- perhaps because they were never stored.

Question 43

Confidence more confident witnesses...? kebell wagstaff and covey (96) found what?

Answer 43

More confident witnesses are perceived to be more accurate Kebbell, Wagstaff & Covey (1996) found a strong relationship when item difficulty was varied and no attempts were made to mislead the witness

Question 44

Confidence can be? People tend to look out for what regarding their beliefs? repeated questioning can?

Answer 44

Confidence can be changed (Luus & Wells, 1994) People tend to look out for information that confirms their beliefs Repeated questioning can falsely increase confidence

Question 45

Accuracy of recall and questioning style

Answer 45

Questioning has a major impact on the accuracy of responses. The most accurate responses are to open questions, e.g., “What happened?” Accuracy rates are similar for children and witnesses with learning disabilities as they are for the general population but less complete (e.g., Perlman et al., 1994).

Question 46

Milne (2006) upside down pyramid

Answer 46

quality decreases as quantity of response increases. free recall and open questions have ~91% quality and 20% quantity questioning (tell, explain, describe, specific 5wh) = less quality and more quantity of words in response leading = worst quality and highest quantity of words in response

Question 47

Accuracy of recall and questioning style what impact does questioning have on accuracy of responses?

Answer 47

Questioning has a major impact on the accuracy of responses. As questions become more and more specific (e.g., from “can you describe him?” to “can you describe his clothes?” to “what colour was his shirt” to “was his shirt red?” responses become less accurate. More closed questions may elicit more information but less is likely to be accurate.

Question 48

Confabulation, suggestibility and acquiescence

Answer 48

Confabulation is the “filling in” of gaps in memory. Children and people with intellectual disabilities tend to be more likely to confabulate than members of the general population (Gudjonsson, 2003).

Question 49

Confabulation, suggestibility and acquiescence what are leading questions?

Answer 49

Leading questions are those which suggest an answer. For instance, “Did you see the man’s red overalls?” Children and people with intellectual disabilities tend to be more suggestible than those of the general population (e.g., Antaki & Rapley, 1996; Clare & Gudjonnsson, 1995).

Question 50

Confabulation, suggestibility and acquiescence Children and those with intellectual disabilities seem to be more likely to?

Answer 50

Children and people with intellectual disabilities seem to be more likely to ACQUIESCE (I.e., say “yes” to questions) particularly in response to questions they don’t understand (“if in doubt say yes”, Matikka & Vesala, 1997).

Question 51

Why? suggestibility is related to what?

Answer 51

Gudjonsson & Clark (1986) suggest two reasons.: 1. Suggestibility is related to memory, i.e. ability to remember the correct answer. 2. Suggestibility is related to coping with uncertainty, expectations and the other pressures associated with an interview.

Question 52

‘Standard’ Interviewing

Answer 52

A number of researchers have described standard police interviews. These descriptions share many common features (e.g., Clifford & George, 1996; Fisher, Geiselman & Raymond, 1987, Memon, Holley, Milne, Kohnken and Bull, 1994) Fisher, Geiselman, & Raymond (1987) provide possibly the best summary

Question 53

dank interrupting sheep joke

Answer 53

relevant because interrupting a witness = bad.

Question 54

Fisher, Geiselman, & Raymond, 1987 what'd they do?

Answer 54

Examined 11 tape recorded interviews by the robbery division of the Florida Police Department Interviews conducted by eight experienced police officers (mean service 10.5 years) Range of offences and offences, e.g., assault with lethal weapon and burglary, use of car, Hispanic or Caucasion offenders

Question 55

Fisher, Geiselman, & Raymond, 1987 What'd they find? what is the central principal of what they found?

Answer 55

Extra information is available from the witness and the effective interviewer is one who can determine the appropriate retrieval cue required to unlock the hidden fact without leading the eyewitness

Question 56

Fisher, Geiselman & Raymond (1987) What main problems did they find (3 of them)

Answer 56

Interrupting eyewitness responses Excessive use of question-answer format Inappropriate sequencing of questions

Question 57

Interrupting eyewitness description starts how? interrupted after how long? bad why?

Answer 57

Often would start with an open question Interrupted after on average 7.5 seconds after the witness starts, thereafter every 3 seconds Breaks the concentration of the witness Encourages the witness to only give short answers

Question 58

Excessive use of question answer-format found what? ratio? bad why?

Answer 58

Found that very few open questions were used (e.g., “can you describe the man?”) but many closed questions were asked (e.g., “what colour was his t-shirt?”) Ratio was 1:9 Less concentrated form of retrieval Only provides information that is requested

Question 59

Inappropriate sequencing of questions sequence of questions was what? bad why?

Answer 59

The sequence of the interviewer’s questions was often incompatible with the mental representations of the witness Often asked in a formulaic manner as if part of a checklist, this disrupts the witness memory for the to be remembered material

Question 60

Inappropriate sequencing of questions second problem is what and whys it bad?

Answer 60

A second problem is a lagging order For example the witness describes a hat then a shirt. Next the officer asks detailed questions about the hat. This often interrupts the witness’s train of thought

Question 61

Inappropriate sequencing of questions shifting modalities bad why?

Answer 61

Finally, problems can also occur when the witness is asked questions that shift between modalities For example, “what was his shirt like?” “What were his glasses like?” “Is he married?” “How much money was in the wallet?” these forms of questioning disrupt the witness’s concentration

Question 62

Other frequently occurring problematic techniques

Answer 62

``` Negative phrasing -“you don’t remember whether?” Non-neutral wording -“was he wearing a black t-shirt?” Inappropriate language -“did you have occasion to…?” Staccato style of questioning -Average of 1 second between question and answers ```

Question 63

Other frequently occurring problematic techniques

Answer 63

Distractions -Radio traffic, people walking in Judgmental comments -“why did you carry so much money?” Lack of follow up of leads -“he looked like a gangster” Underemphasis of auditory cues ------Very little information asked about auditory events

Question 64

Questioning style Open and closed questions

Answer 64

--Open questions get the most accurate answers (e.g., “what happened?”) --As questions get more specific and closed (e.g., from “describe him” to “describe his clothes” to “what colour was his shirt?”) answers become less accurate.

Question 65

Dent and Stephenson (1979) forty children shown a video What was the accuracy for varying question types?

Answer 65

Free recall 14.2 correct, 1.4 incorrect, 91% Open 22.0 correct, 3.0 incorrect, 88% Closed 34.0 correct, 8.2 incorrect, 81%

Question 66

Leading questions and suggestibility

Answer 66

Leading questions such as “was his shirt red?” suggest the man wore a red shirt. Accuracy can be adversely influenced by these kinds of questions

Question 67

Leading questions and suggestibility loftus and palmer car crash study

Answer 67

Loftus and Palmer (1974) Shown a film of a car accident Later asked “about how fast were the cars going when they contacted each other? Words substituted included smashed, collided, bumped and hit Smashed estimated 40.8mph Contacted estimated 30.8mph More likely to say yes to seeing broken glass

Question 68

Yea-saying

Answer 68

General tendency to say yes to questions, particularly if the witness is vulnerable or if the question is not understood.

Question 69

The cognitive interview original cognitive interview involved what four instructions?

Answer 69

Reinstate mental context Report everything Recall events in different orders Change perspectives

Question 70

The cognitive interview instructions were hypothesised to enhance recall why?

Answer 70

These instructions were hypothesised to enhance recall because: There are several retrieval paths to memory of an event and information that is not accessible with one path might be accessible with another A memory trace comprises several features and a retrieval cue is effective to the extent that there is overlap between the encoded input and the retrieval cue

Question 71

Experimental support for reinstatement of context and for reporting everything

Answer 71

Reinstatement of context Godden & Baddeley (1975) diving experiment (divers could recall words learnt underwater better when they were underwater again vs on land) Smith (1979) students’ recall of word lists Report everything Kassin, Ellsworth & Smith (1989) confidence not always related to accuracy, therefore lowering criteria for report may help Erdelyi (1984) hypermnesia effect from trying again

Question 72

Experimental support for recalling events in diff orders and for changing perspectives

Answer 72

Recall events in different orders ---Geiselman & Callot (1990) found that recalling events in different orders improved recall Change perspectives ---Anderson & Pichert (1978) changed perspectives from housebuyer to burglar to elicit different recall

Question 73

Support for the cognitive interview who found what when?

Answer 73

Fisher, Firstenberg, Hutton, Sullivan, Avetissian & Prosk (1984) found significantly more information recalled

Question 74

The enhanced cognitive interview fisher, geiselman, raymond, jurkevich and warhafig (87), addressed problems that occured in standard interviews by ensuring what?

Answer 74

Rapport is established Control is transferred to the witness Witness compatible questions are asked Focussed retrieval is used Witnesses use imagery

Question 75

What support is there for the enhanced cognitive interview?

Answer 75

Geiselman, Fisher, MacKinnon & Holland (1985) compared standard interviews, hypnosis and the cognitive interview. Cognitive interview increased recall by approximately 40% compared to the standard interview and was similar to that of the hypnotic interview

Question 76

How to conduct a cognitive interview (from Kohnken, 1993) (first 3 steps) greet, establish, explain

Answer 76

Greet and swap names Establish rapport Explain the purpose of the interview - --Transfer control - --Encourage to describe everything - --Remind not to make things up

Question 77

How to conduct a cognitive interview (from Kohnken, 1993) (next 3 steps) reinstate, initiate, after free report what?

Answer 77

Reinstate context Initiate a free report ---Indicate that the task will require concentration After free report: pause & ask if the witness can remember more

Question 78

How to conduct a cognitive interview (from Kohnken, 1993) 2 more steps questioning, activate

Answer 78

Questioning part - -Explain that you will ask questions - -Repeat the report everything and don’t fabricate instructions - -Explain the don’t know alternative --Activate the image

Question 79

How to conduct a cognitive interview (from Kohnken, 1993) 4 final steps probe, change, reverse, closure

Answer 79

Probe the image - Begin with open ended questions - Follow-up with detailed questions Give instructions to change perspectives Give instruction for description in reverse order Closure

Question 80

Problems with the cognitive interview | 3 things

Answer 80

Time Communicating the mnemonics Training