5208776
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony: misleading information
- leading questions and post event discussion
- leading questions
- procedure
- Loftus and Palmer
- clips of a car accident
- asked how fast the car was going
- changed the speed: contacted bumped collided and smashed
- changed the speed: contacted bumped collided and smashed
- asked how fast the car was going
- clips of a car accident
- Loftus and Palmer
- findings
- mean speed was higher for smashed than contacted
- smashed was 41mph
- contacted was 30mph
- smashed was 41mph
- mean speed was higher for smashed than contacted
- why do leading questions affect EWT
- response bias explanation
- wording of the question does not effect
participants memories
- but influences how they decide the answer
- but influences how they decide the answer
- wording of the question does not effect
participants memories
- substitution explanation
- the wording of a leading question
changes the memory
- participants who were given the word
smashed were more likely to report
broken glass
- participants who were given the word
smashed were more likely to report
broken glass
- the wording of a leading question
changes the memory
- response bias explanation
- procedure
- post event discussion
- when co-witnesses discuss their EWT become contaminated
- from misinformation from other witnesses with their own memories
- procedure
- Gabbert
- pairs saw the same crime but form different angles
- then they discussed before testing their recall
- then they discussed before testing their recall
- pairs saw the same crime but form different angles
- Gabbert
- findings
- 71% of participants mistakenly recalled aspects
of the event that they didn't see but had been
told
- in the control group (no discussion) there was 0%
- go along with it to gain social approval or because they
thought they were wrong
- called memory conformity
- called memory conformity
- go along with it to gain social approval or because they
thought they were wrong
- in the control group (no discussion) there was 0%
- 71% of participants mistakenly recalled aspects
of the event that they didn't see but had been
told
- procedure
- from misinformation from other witnesses with their own memories
- when co-witnesses discuss their EWT become contaminated
- leading questions
- evaluation
- useful real life applications
- affect how police now interview people after crimes
- when EWT are very important
- when EWT are very important
- affect how police now interview people after crimes
- the tasks are artificial
- watched film clips
- different experience to seeing a real one
- trauma may make people forget
- artificial tasks - EWT may be more reliable then we think
- artificial tasks - EWT may be more reliable then we think
- trauma may make people forget
- different experience to seeing a real one
- watched film clips
- individual differences
- older people are less accurate than younger in EWT
- Anastasi and Rhodes
- people between 18-25 and
35-45 were more accurate
then 55-78
- were more accurate when it was people their own age
- own age bias
- own age bias
- were more accurate when it was people their own age
- people between 18-25 and
35-45 were more accurate
then 55-78
- Anastasi and Rhodes
- older people are less accurate than younger in EWT
- useful real life applications
- evaluation +
- demand characteristics
- Zaragosa and McCloskey
- answers given in a lab are a result of demand characteristics
- don't want to let the researcher down - helpful and attentive
- don't want to let the researcher down - helpful and attentive
- answers given in a lab are a result of demand characteristics
- Zaragosa and McCloskey
- consequences of EWT
- Foster
- EWT can have huge consequences in the real world - not in a lab
- EWT can have huge consequences in the real world - not in a lab
- Foster
- demand characteristics
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.