Leading questions

Eyewitness testimony

The ability of people to remember the details of events, like accidents or crimes that they have observed themselves.

Leading questions

A question which, because of the way it is phrased, suggests a certain answer

Post event discussion

Occurs when there is more than one witness to an event. Witnesses may discuss what they have seen with co-witnesses or with other people.

This may influence the accuracy of each witness’s recall of the event

Memory contamination

When co-witness to a crime discuss it with each other, their EWTs may be altered or distorted. They combine information from other witnesses with their own memories

Memory conformity

Witnesses go along with each other either to gain approval or because they believe the other is right and they are wrong.

The actual memory is unchanged.

LQ Loftus and Palmer research

45 students

Had to watch film clips of a car accident and asked them questions about the accident.

In a leading question participants were asked to describe how fast the cars were travelling.

5 groups. Each had a different verb in the leading question

Mean estimate was calculated.

Results:

1. Contacted 31.8

2. Hit 34.0

3. Bumped 38.1

4. Collided 39.3

5. Smashed 40.5

The leading question biased the eyewitness’s recall of an event

Loftus and Palmer replication

150 subjects saw a video of a car crash

Hit - 50 subjects - 8/50

Smashed - 50 subjects - 16/50

Control group - 50 subjects - 7/50

Sent away for a week

Critical question: “Was there any broken glass?” No broken glass in the video

Memories were altered.

PED Gabbert research

Studied participants in pairs.

Each participant watched a video of the same crime but at a different point of view. Each participant saw elements that the others couldn’t.

71% mistakenly recalled aspects of the event they didn’t see in the video but picked up in discussion. In a control group, no inaccurate recall.

Evidence of memory conformity.

LQ S Loftus

Practical application in the criminal justice system

Presented evidence in court about the serious effects of leading questions on memory. May lead to faulty convictions. Police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their questions. Expert witnesses in court trials may explain the limits of EWT to juries

Shows psychologists can help to improve the way the legal system works

LQ W Sutherland and Hayne

EWT more accurate for certain parts of an event

Showed participants a video clip.

When later asked leading questions, participants’ recall was more accurate for the central details than for peripheral ones.

Their attention was focused on central features and these memories were relatively resistant to leading questions

Original memories for central details were not distorted. This is not predicted by the substitution explanation

S Controlled Conditions

W Controlled Conditions

Loftus and Palmer study

High in control in extraneous variables.

Easily replicable, can test reliability of results

Lacks ecological validity. Used film footage rather than a real event. Leads to the task lacking emotional effects of witnessing a real event

Hard to generalise findings.

PED S Paterson + Kemp

Research evidence

Showed participants a video of a crime followed by misinformation like leading questions and PED.

A week later participants were tested individually on their recall of the video. Showed PED had a stronger influence on eyewitness memory.

Suggests that the effects of PED should be taken seriously during criminal investigation

PED W Skagerberg and Wright

May depend on perceived credibility

790 participants watching a crime video

Provided with additional information from a co-witness and were then asked questions about the event.

When information came from a high-credibility source, their testimonies were more affected than if information came from a low-credibility source.

Credibility of co-witnesses should be monitored to prevent undue influence on EWT