Studied by 0 people
Misleading information and anxiety
What are 3 misleading information factors that affect eyewitness testimony + researcher?
Leading questions - Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Post event discussion - Gabbert et al. (2003)
Repeating interviews - LaRooy et al (2005)
Who investigated whether the wording of a question affects memory recall (leading questions)?
Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Investigated whether the wording of a question impacted memory recall. Participants were asked to watch a film of a car incident and were asked to estimate how fast the cars were going when the ‘smashed/collided/bumped/hit/contacted” each other?
The verb used influence estimates: smashed (highest) → 40.5, contacted (lowest) → 31.8
Participants who heard smashed were more likely to recall broken glass even though there was none.
Leading questions can distort memory, supporting the idea that EWT is reconstructive, meaning memories are influenced by external information.
Who investigated whether post event discussion influences accuracy of EWT ?
Gabbert et al. 2003 - participants watched a video of a crime from different perspectives, each person saw details others could not. After watching they were put into pairs and discussed. (Control no discussion).
71% of participants who had discussed recalled details they hadn’t seen but picked up in discussion.
Memory can be contaminated by discussion.
How might repeated interviews lead to an inaccurate EWT?
Repeated interviews leads to memory distortion as witnesses may:
Alter memory based on questions asked, incorporate new information from media or police ect. , increase their confidence in inaccurate details.
LaRooy et al. 2005 suggested that children are especially vulnerable to memory changes after multiple interviews, - source confusion (forgetting what they know themselves and what they found out from someone else)
Evaluate misleading information - strength
Research
Research has practical application In improving the justice system
Loftus and Palme led to the development of the cognitive interview
High external validity
Evaluate misleading information - strength
Reliable research
Reliable research
Gabbert et al 2003 → lab experiments, standardised and replicable
Consistent results
Evaluate misleading information - limitation
Low ecological validity l+p
Loftus and Palmer lacks ecological validity
Experiment lacks emotional arousal which can also affect memory
Memory is affected differently in real life settings
Lacks external validity
Evaluate misleading information - limitation
Individual differences
Gabbert et al - some people less susceptible to accepting conversation as their own account.
E.g. older people may be more likely to accept someone else’s memory as their own.
Findings may not be universal
Therefore may not generalise to the wider population.
Evaluate misleading information - limitation
Some repeated interviews leads to improved accuracy
Some repeated interviews lead into improved accuracy
Cognitive interviews
Accuracy is dependent on how the interview was conducted
May not generalise to every testimony.
What are the negative egrets of anxiety on EWT + research?
Higher anxiety can distract witnesses leading to poorer recall - weapon focus effect
Johnson and Scott - investigated whether the presence of a weapon reduced the accuracy of EWT.
Low anxiety condition - man walks out holding a pen covered in grease.
High anxiety condition - man walks out holding a knife
Participants were then asked to identify the man from 50 photos.
49% accuracy for low anxiety vs 33% accuracy or high anxiety.
Suggests that weapon distracted attention from the persons face, supporting weapon focus effect and that anxiety narrows attention, reducing memory accuracy.
What are the positive effects of anxiety on EWT (research)?
Yuille and Cutshaw (1986) - studied a real life gunshop robbery in Canada, 13 witnesses interviewed 4-5 months later and compared to original police reports, witnesses also rated stress levels. Witnesses with higher anxiety levels had more accurate recall (88% vs 75%)
Concluded that high anxiety enhances memory recall, contradicting Johnson and Scott, suggesting anxiety has a more complex effect.
What’s the law that suggests moderate levels of anxiety optimises recall?
Yerkes and Dodson law.
Moderate anxiety = best recall
Low or high anxiety = worst recall
High anxiety may enhance recall due to fight or flight response making key details more vivid. Explains why some people find positive effects and others find negative effects.
Evaluate Anxiety as a factor affecting EWT - strength
Supporting evidence
Johnson and Scott supporting evidence for weapon focus effect
49% low anxiety 33% high anxiety
Lab experiment, fewer extraneous variables meaning attention is narrowed
Might not replicate real life - low ecological validity
Evaluate Anxiety as a factor affecting EWT - strength
Real life application
Cognitive interview - tries to lower anxiety levels to increase accuracy levels
Evaluate Anxiety as a factor affecting EWT - limitations
Weapon focus - unusualness
Weapon focus may be due to unusualness
Pickel 1998 conducted a similar study to Johnson and Scott using a chicken
but found that there was lower recall rates because people focussed on the chicken
because of how unusual it was and not because of anxiety,
therefore weakening the arguement that anxiety alone reduces recall.
Evaluate Anxiety as a factor affecting EWT - limitation
Inverted U - too simplistic
Too simplistic
Yerkes Dodson law
Doesn’t account for individual differences some people may perform better under high anxiety/pressure
Therefore a limited explanation
Evaluate Anxiety as a factor affecting EWT - limitation
Ethical issues - J + S
Johnson and Scott ethical issues
Caused distress - goes against psychology guidelines
