Reliability of cognitive processes

what is reliabiloty?

what is reliabiloty?

Reliability refers to the consistency and dependability of a measurement or observation

How does it connects to the cognitive process?

In the context of cognitive psychology, reliability indicates how consistently a cognitive process or assessment tool produces stable and consistent results under consistent conditions.

• High reliability means that repeated measures yield similar results, whereas low reliability indicates variability and inconsistency.

What is a particular cognitive process that involves the questioning of reliability?

Eye-witness testimony (EWT)

what is EWT

EWT is a legal term which refers to an account given by people of an event they have witnessed, and is vital as evidence in criminal trials. Memory is thus extremely important, and plays a vital role in EWT.

what is it normally used for

Eyewitness testimony is a crucial component in the criminal justice system. It involves the recollections and statements made by individuals who have witnessed a crime or significant event. Such testimonies can be used to:

• Identify Suspects: Witnesses can provide descriptions or identify perpetrators in line-ups.

why is it not seen as reliable

Whilst in the past eye-witness testimony was seen as very reliable, research has suggested that it can be subject to distortion and reconstruction. This is due to the fact that memories may be influenced by other factors due to the reconstructive nature of memory.

• Stress and Trauma: High-stress situations, such as witnessing a crime, can impair the encoding and recall of memories.

name of a sutdy?

Loftus and Palmer (1974)

aim

To investigate whether leading questions asked of eyewitnesses after an event can change memory of that event.

method

 45 American university students were split into five groups and were shown seven film clips of traffic accidents. Following each film, participants were asked to write a brief account, and then to answer questions, one of which was the leading question: 'About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other?' The verb 'hit' was used for one group, and was replaced with either 'smashed', 'collided', 'bumped', or 'contacted' for each of the other groups.

results

The verb 'smashed' yielded a mean estimate of 40.5mph, while participants with the verb 'contacted' in their question estimated a mean speed of 31.8mph.

conclusion

External information supplied (or in this case implied) after the fact, can change memories of an event. This ties in with schema theory, where the schema invoked by the word 'smashed' is a more serious accident than that invoked by the word 'contacted'.