PSY 384 Exam 2

Encoding

Gathering/depositing. Gathering info and putting it in form that can be held in memory. Moving from WM to LTM.

Storage

Holding encoded info in brain over time. Moving from WM to LTM.

Retrieval

Accessing/remembering. Accessing and pulling out stored info at later time. Move from LTM to WM.

Memory Cnstruction/Reconstruction

Filter/fill in missing pieces of info make recall more coherent. We reweave memories and incorporate info we imagined/expected/saw/heard after event.

Source Amnesia

Attribution of event to wrong source that we experienced/heard/read/imagines. Heart of many false memories. Misattribution

Misinformation Effect

Incorporating misleading info into memory of event. Reconstruct memory when questioned about event.

Suggestibility

Children being more suggestible, corrupts testimony/interview when have suggestive/leading questions. Leads to false accusations.

Schema-Driven Memories

Memories that are shaped or created based on our schemas (mental frameworks of knowledge to describe reality). Enhance memory for info that aligns with schema/impair those that don’t fit.

Scripts

Mental blueprints for sequences of events/actions/actors, expectations/prior knowledge. Mostly learned -> LTM, interaction b/w facts and scripts about similar cases (TV/books).

Barlett Study

Recollections not verbatim and reflect cultural biases/interpretations (did not agree on details). Memories of story changed over time, retelling became shorter leaving out ambiguities and supernatural components, recall order based on cause and effect.

Barlett & Scripts

Prior knowledge effects how encode experiences. Force-fit info personal/cultural scripts.

Eyewitness Testimony

Most compelling evidence in court and most persuasive to jury.

Eyewitness Testimony Prevalence

347 cases with only testimony. 74% conviction, 49% based on single witness.

Eyewitness Testimony & Wrongful Imprisonment

Leads to more wrongful conviction that any other evidence. 70% of wrongfully imprisoned (DNA exoneration).

Law’s Memory

Memory is accurate, confidence correlates with accuracy.

Memory Laws

Memory often wrong/distorted (constructed), confidence almost meaningless.

Manson Criteria

Opportunity to view, level of attention, accuracy of match b/w description and suspect, degree of certainty, time lapse b/w crime & ID.

Opportunity to View

Length of time, distance, lighting, angle.

Level of Attentiion

Distracted. Did not know crime was in progress.

Difficulty Applying

Limited ability to evaluate attention/view time, timer overestimation, time effect on witnessing and ID, confidence ¹ accurate, biased questioning/lineup, undue juror faith.

Stress & Memory

Stress effects encoding (vivid but no more accurate). High stress leads to fewer correct IDs and more false positives (guilty decision but actually innocent).

Weapons Effect

Witness focuses on weapon no the assailant, leads to poorer ID rates.

Retrieval-Induced Inhibition

Recalling certain information can inhibit or suppress the retrieval of related, but non-retrieved information.

Memory Confidence

Weakly correlated with accuracy. Correlated with persuasiveness and persuades jurors/judge. Witness investment increases and social pressure to be right so confidence goes up.

Context-Dependent Memory

Memory retrieval enhanced when context during recall march context when info encoded. Should reinstate context at scene to enhance recall.

Confirmation Feedback

Confirming -> greater confidence, better view/attention/longer time.

Estimator Variables

Factors outside the legal system’s control. Ex: View length.

System Variables

Factors under the legal system’s control.

Sequential Lineups

View one person/photo at a time. Reduces relative judgement.

Simultaneous Lineups

Suspect shown all photos at once in grid or array.

Cognitive Interview

Enhance recall. 25% increase in correct recollections. Interview observers at crime scene/imagine back to reinstate context. Witness report everything that recall, even if incomplete/make no sense. Observer recount events in different sequences.

Competence

Whether individual has sufficient ability to perform necessary personal/legal functions. From arrest to sentencing.

Competency Types

Waive Miranda rights, plead guilty, right to attorney. To be executed, make treatment decisions, execute will/contract, take care of finances.

Competency Factors

Understand situation/charges, understand pleas/penalties, roles of judge/prosecution/defense, communicate w/ counsel, aid in developing strategy/cross-exam, make appropriate strategy decisions.

CST Evaluator

Interviews defendant, administrate psych tests, review history, write report.

CST Evaluations

Getting better (more links b/w mental illness & deficits), fail to tie explicit connections. Composed by MH professional, outpatient/inpatient, may recommend treatments.

Beyond Reasonable Doubt

High certainty. Judge and jury fully convinced of guilt. Highest standard of proof.

Preponderance

Defense must probe that it is likely that defendant is incompetent. Judge must be 50% sure.

Presumption of Competency

Defendants presumed to be competent unless proven otherwise.

Competence & Judge Acceptance

Rarely rejected by judge (80-99% accepted).

Competence Restoration

Typically antipsychotic medication treatment that physical side effects. Medication refusal. Held in MH facility, determination about restoration in future (non-restorable charges may be dismissed). Education and treatment.

Malingering

Intentional faking illness motivated by incentives/goals. Fake incompetence to avoid trial/jail. Difficult to detect but tests available.

Insanity

Lacks moral responsibility/culpability, State of mind at crime. Not related to mental illness?

Retribution

Suggest punishment should be proportionate to harm committed. Not fair if don’t understand.

Deterrence

Built on principle that punishment should be used to learn consequences of crime. Not fair if don’t understand.

Insanity Defense

Built on principle that people commit crimes w/o full awareness and should not be punished. Immoral to punish.

Insanity Myths

Insanity defense overused, is low-risk strategy to avoid guilt/gain lighter sentence, highly contested/lack agreement.

Overused

Used in less than 1% of felonies, fails in 75% of cases, defense & prosecution agree 70%.

Low-Risk Strategy

NGRI spend longer time in custody, secure psych hospital better than prison?

NGRI Trends

Trend toward focusing on cognitive ability (right from wrong) and volitional capacity (conform conduct to law).

Infantile Amnesia

Difficulty distinguishing imagined from real before age 5. Ability to encode, store, and retrieve info not fully developed.

Children & Susceptibility

Children are more susceptible to suggestive techniques and reinforcement.

Anatomically Correct Dolls

Can be helpful, also highly suggestible, false positives, no universal protocol.

Children’s Testimony

Hearsay allowed in most states.

Children & Juror Response

Believe children in abuse cases. Young children more believed than adolescents bc sexual maturity (too naïve/not manipulative to lie).

Live Testimony Alternatives

Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) lowers emotional distress and doesn’t lower conviction rate.

Freudian Basis

Traumatic events repressed automatically and unconsciously. Locked away for years. Unconscious trauma creates manifest symptoms. Use psychoanalytic to retrieve memories.

Lindsay & Read Skepticism

Slow recovery over time where suggestive/coercive therapy occurs, starts as vague images/feelings, repeated abuse (rarely forgotten), memories before age 3-5, rare events (satanic rituals/murder).

Recovered Memories & Therapists

Trauma leads to repression as defense mechanism (real), memories intact but no accessible (unconscious mind), retrieval = symptom relief, accurate accounts.

Recovered Memories & Scientists

Regression unlikely/rare (usually overthink), memories reconstructed/fallible, therapy techniques -> false memories, lack of evidence, false accusations?, easily implant memories.