Psychocolgy1

Psychocolgy1

1. Factors affecting Eyewitness testimony

   • Misleading Information
     • Leading questions: a question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted.
       • Loftus and Palmer study: Participants watched videos of car crashed and then asked how fast the car was travelling, but each time changing the describing works used.
         • Groups (verbs): Smashed, Collided, hit, bumped and contacted
         • Results: The leading questions contaminated the participants recall of events
       • Why Leading Questions effects EWT
         • Response bias: wording of question has no effect on participants memories, it just influences how they decide to answer
         • substitution: The wording of the question actually changes the participants memory
     • Evaluation
       • Useful in real life: watched videos, which is different to real life expereince
       • evidence that older people are less accurate when giving EWT then younger people
       • Demand characteristics: Participants want to seem helpful+attentive, so chnage their answers to what they think will be best
   • Post event discussion: Witness of an event discuss the crime after witnessing it
     • Gabbert et al study: each participant watched a video of the same crime, but from different persectives. Both participant then discussed what they'd seen before completing the recall tests
       • Results: 71% recalled elements they'd not seen but only discussed. The corosponding group, where there was no discussion, had 0% recall of elements they'd not seen.
   • Anxiety: a state of apprehension and psychic tension occurring in some forms of mental disorder
     • There are studies showing support for both negative and positive effects of anxiety in EWT
       • Negative: there's a psychological arousal, which prevents us to pay attention to cues, so recall is worse
         • Johnson and Johnson study: lead participants to believe they were taking part in a lab study. Participants heard an argument. In a 'low anxiety', they saw a man walking through the room, carrying a pen and with grease on his hands. Other participants heard same argument, but this time accompanied with breaking glass. A man walked through the room, this time carrying a paper knife covered in blood
           • Results: Paritipants had to pick the man out from a set of 50 photos. 49% of them could identify the man with the pen, but only 33% recognised the man with the gun covered in blood
             • Weapon focus: The participants were more focused on the gun rather then the face becuase the gun was more unsual. The pen was normal, so participants focused on the mans face
       • Positive: Flight or fight reponse is triggered, increasing alertness and improving memory as we're more aware of cues
         • Yuille and Cutshall study: conducted research on a shooting. Interviews held 4 moths after shooting and compared with original police interviews. Accuracy determined by number of details recalled. Witness also asked how stressed they were on a scale of 7.
           • Results: Reults were very accurate after 5 months, with highest accuracy for those more stressed (88% compared to 75% less stressed)

Imagens e arquivos do mapa