YUILLE AND CUTSHALL (1986)

YUILLE AND CUTSHALL (1986)

1. AIM

   • RECORD / EVALUATE WITNESS ACCOUNTS
   • FIELD STUDY OF EWT
   • CHECK ACCURACY OF EWT

2. PROCEDURE

   • 13/21 USED
     • 2 MOVED 5 DIDN´T TAKE PART
     • 20 CONTACTED
   • WITNESSES INTERVIEWED 4-5 MONTHS LATER
     • 2 MISLEADING QS
       • ´´A´´ OR ´´THE´´ BUSTED (BROKEN) HEADLIGHT
         • NO BUSTED HEADLIGHT
       • ´´A´´ OR ´´THE´´ YELLOW QUARTER PANEL CAR
         • CAR WAS BLUE
     • SCORING SYSTEM USED
       • COMPARISONS MADE WITH REAL EVENT
       • ACTION DETAIL
       • PERSON DESCRIPTION
       • OBJECT DESCRIPTION

3. RESULTS

   • 79-85% ACCURACY - POLICE
     • EQUALLY AS HIGH - RESEARCHERS
     • 79% PERIPHIAL
     • 85% CENTRAL
   • MISLEADING INFO LITTLE EFFECT

4. CONCLUSION

   • REAL-LIFE EWT ARE ACCURATE
   • FLASHBULB MEMORY USED
     • LABS DON´T STIMULATE THIS
   • MISLEADING QS GO AGAINST LAB FINDINGS
   • AROUSAL HAS AN EFFECT
   • JUDGES SHOULD ACCEPT EWT

5. EVAULATION

   • STRENGTHS
     • FIELD - VALID
     • GREAT CARE SCORING
   • WEAKNESSES
     • CAN´T GENERALISE - UNIQUE CASE
     • SOME INACCURACIES WITH SCORING
       • LOOKED IN HIS 20S
         • COUNTED AS INACCURATE
         • IN HIS 30S
     • SCORING TURNS QULI TO QUANT - SUBJECTIVE

Images and files in the map