2404196
Description
Mind Map by kevincosgrove02, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by kevincosgrove02
almost 11 years ago
|
|
Factors affecting eye witness testimonies
- When you are a witness to a crime which you seen with
your own eyes, you are typically believed. Loftus and Palmer
shown us how certain leading questions can affect
someones recollection of an event, suggesting what they
saw might also skewed. Big questions? whetheir EWT are
accurate and reliable in court; as things such as emotion,
attributional biases could be a factor
- RECONSTRUCTIVE MEMORY
- our memory isnt a snapshot of an
event. This theory implies that our
memory is stored through fragments,
suggested by Frederick Bartlett.
- When we recall something, we reconstruct these fragments;
this overall can lead to inaccuracies due to past experiences,
beliefs and expectations, creating unreliable recollections.
- New mexico in 1947, debris fell from
sky, which alleged to be alien crash.
we will never know real story, as
memories are shaped by own beliefs.
- SCHEMAS
- A major theory is from Bartlett's
idea is that we generate
expectations from our beliefs. as
shown by Carmichael et al in 1932.
- EVALUATION
- Participants were shown a set of drawing; there were 2 groups, who were given descriptions of the
drawings. When asked to recall the image, the label affected their drawing; showing how language
can affect ones recollection. Phrase used set up a set of expectations; showing how schemas can
affect recollection, can be generalised to crime. This supports the idea of reconstructive memory as
it shows how our memory isnt an accurate and reliable belief. could affect what EW say they saw.
- Questioned as to whether schemas affect our initial perception or do they affect subsequent recall?
Bartletts original theory was that schemas affected the retrieval process however more recent
studies how shown how it can affect initial comprehension and storage. For example, Loftus and
Palmers study of leading questions of post event information found that leading questions could
affect their original memory, rather than changing their response bias. Criticises as it implies how the
theory of reconstructive memory may be correct in some aspects, however the reliability is
questioned as other researchers have found different results.
- Participants were shown a set of drawing; there were 2 groups, who were given descriptions of the
drawings. When asked to recall the image, the label affected their drawing; showing how language
can affect ones recollection. Phrase used set up a set of expectations; showing how schemas can
affect recollection, can be generalised to crime. This supports the idea of reconstructive memory as
it shows how our memory isnt an accurate and reliable belief. could affect what EW say they saw.
- EVALUATION
- A major theory is from Bartlett's
idea is that we generate
expectations from our beliefs. as
shown by Carmichael et al in 1932.
- SCHEMAS
- New mexico in 1947, debris fell from
sky, which alleged to be alien crash.
we will never know real story, as
memories are shaped by own beliefs.
- When we recall something, we reconstruct these fragments;
this overall can lead to inaccuracies due to past experiences,
beliefs and expectations, creating unreliable recollections.
- STEREOTYPES
- Is a form of schema about a particular
group of people. Implied how these
stereotypes can change our recollection of
events.
- EVALUATION
- Allport and Postman in 1947 found results
which supported the idea that stereotypes
and schemas can affect their recollection.
Were shown 2 men 1 black, arguing, where
the white male had a knife. when asked to
recall, participants remembered the black
male with the razor. This supports the idea
that our memory can be affected as certain
racial beliefs can affect their belief; in this
case, who was guilty.
- Tuckey and brewer in 2003 shown a video of a bank robbery. they found that participants could
recall certain aspects which fit stereotype; such as mask, male. they also remembered
information which countered the stereotype, such as all carry guns. supports as implies how by
having a belief; can change how an individual remembers certain aspects, might ignore
important information.
- Allport and Postman in 1947 found results
which supported the idea that stereotypes
and schemas can affect their recollection.
Were shown 2 men 1 black, arguing, where
the white male had a knife. when asked to
recall, participants remembered the black
male with the razor. This supports the idea
that our memory can be affected as certain
racial beliefs can affect their belief; in this
case, who was guilty.
- EVALUATION
- Is a form of schema about a particular
group of people. Implied how these
stereotypes can change our recollection of
events.
- our memory isnt a snapshot of an
event. This theory implies that our
memory is stored through fragments,
suggested by Frederick Bartlett.
- ROLE OF EMOTION
- Typically in crime, participants will experience fear and other emotions.
studied to see whether these could alter their recollection. could it improve
recollection or hinder? Been theorised that increase in emotion could create
flashbulb memories; or possibly repress such information due to stress
caused, this could be caused by witnessing crime.
- WEAPON EFFECT
- Proposed by Loftus et al in 1987, suggested that
if a weapon is present, witness will tend to focus
on it, rather than the criminal, due to being
scared.
- EVALUATION
- Supported by Johnson and scott in 1978, where participants were
waiting for a study to begin, where they saw a man carrying a
bloodied knife, whereas the other group say a greasy pen. They found
that those who saw the weapon, were less accurate when recalling
aspects of criminal. Supports weapon effect as suggests how an
individuals recollection can be inccurate due to acertain factors.
- Supported by Johnson and scott in 1978, where participants were
waiting for a study to begin, where they saw a man carrying a
bloodied knife, whereas the other group say a greasy pen. They found
that those who saw the weapon, were less accurate when recalling
aspects of criminal. Supports weapon effect as suggests how an
individuals recollection can be inccurate due to acertain factors.
- EVALUATION
- Proposed by Loftus et al in 1987, suggested that
if a weapon is present, witness will tend to focus
on it, rather than the criminal, due to being
scared.
- WEAPON EFFECT
- Typically in crime, participants will experience fear and other emotions.
studied to see whether these could alter their recollection. could it improve
recollection or hinder? Been theorised that increase in emotion could create
flashbulb memories; or possibly repress such information due to stress
caused, this could be caused by witnessing crime.
- ATTRIBUTIONAL BIASES
- typically, individuals will look either towards situational,
or dispositional reasons for behaviour. EW will typically
will commit fundamental attributional errors,
overestimating dispositional factors, an example of this
would be a shop alarm, thinking they are a thief rather
than a malfunction.
- ACTOR OBSERVER EFFECT
- tend to make situational attributions for our own behaviour, and
look towards dispositional factors for others; causing guilt to
others. This suggests that EWT may not be objective as they tend
to look to attributions which will change how they recall events.
- EVALUATION
- Evidence which supports actor observer effects, found that victims of crimes, may
look for other reasons as to why it happened. greater the personal trauma, the
higher chance of making dispositional errors. Walster in 1966, gave participants a
situation of a car rolling down the hill. when he described, little damage to the car,
they would blame situational factors; whereas when a large damage, more
dispositional. This overall supports the idea that individuals may look for different
causes, causing inaccuracy with their recollection. This could be referred to in crime,
as if the event is traumatic for the individual, they may blame dispositional factors.
- Evidence which supports actor observer effects, found that victims of crimes, may
look for other reasons as to why it happened. greater the personal trauma, the
higher chance of making dispositional errors. Walster in 1966, gave participants a
situation of a car rolling down the hill. when he described, little damage to the car,
they would blame situational factors; whereas when a large damage, more
dispositional. This overall supports the idea that individuals may look for different
causes, causing inaccuracy with their recollection. This could be referred to in crime,
as if the event is traumatic for the individual, they may blame dispositional factors.
- EVALUATION
- tend to make situational attributions for our own behaviour, and
look towards dispositional factors for others; causing guilt to
others. This suggests that EWT may not be objective as they tend
to look to attributions which will change how they recall events.
- EVALUATION
- Barjonet in 1980 found that people till typically believe car
crashes caused by dispositional error rather than situational. this
supports attribution biases, as shows how individuals will blame
an individuals disposition rather than situation.
- Barjonet in 1980 found that people till typically believe car
crashes caused by dispositional error rather than situational. this
supports attribution biases, as shows how individuals will blame
an individuals disposition rather than situation.
- ACTOR OBSERVER EFFECT
- typically, individuals will look either towards situational,
or dispositional reasons for behaviour. EW will typically
will commit fundamental attributional errors,
overestimating dispositional factors, an example of this
would be a shop alarm, thinking they are a thief rather
than a malfunction.
- TO CONCLUDE, There is several pieces suggesting EWT are not accurate, as can be altered by many
factors. certain past experiences or beliefs may alter their recollection; causing them to give false
statements. The main problem with this is that EWT are respected so much in court as they are
believed to be first hand cases of events, even to the point where Loftus found how juries will
believe EWT more than forensic science. The ability to recall an event is subjective to each individual
making it hard to rely on it as a piece of evidence
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.