Factors affecting the accuracy of EWT - misleading info

• what are the factors effecting the accuracy of EWT? misleading information and axiety
• what is misleading information? when a wording of a question leads you to a certian answer
• why is misleading information an issue for EWT? police may direct a witness to give a certain answer
• what are the two types of misleading information? Leading questions and post event discussion
• who conducted research on leading questions? Loftus and Palmer (1974)
• what did loft and palmer do? arranged 45 students to watch film clips of a car accident and asked questions on it

  they were asked to describe how fast the car was

  each group had either 'hit', 'collided' 'contacted' 'bump' 'smashed
• what were the findings of loft and palmers research on leading questions? - mean estimate speed was calculated for each group

  - 'contacted' 31.8mpj

  - 'smashed' - 40.5 mph
• why do leading questions effect EWT? response bias explanation: wording of the question has no real effect on pps memories, it just influences how they decide to answer

  'smashed' encourages them to choose a higher speed estimate
• why do leading questions effect EWT? substitution explanation: wording of a question changes memory of film clip - e.g pps who heard smashed saw broken glass when there was none
• who conducted research on post event discussion? fionna gabbert 2003
• how did gabbert conduct research on post event discussion? studied pps in pairs and watched a video of a crime from different points of view then both pps discussed what they saw before completing a recall test
• what were the findings of gabberts research on post event discussion? - 71% recalled things they didn't see

  - in a control group, with no discussion, the figure was 0%

  - evidence of memory conformity
• why does post event discussion effect EWT? memory contamination: - when co-witnesses discuss the crime their EWT become altered

  - they combine misinformation with their own memories
• why does post event discussion effect EWT? memory conformity: - gabbert et al said that witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or they believe other witnesses are right

  - actual memory remains unchanged
• strengths: P - practical use in criminal justice system: E - consequences of EWT = serious

  - loftus 1975 said that leading questions distort memory and that police must be careful how they phrase their Q's

  - psychologists can be asked to be expert witnesses in court and explain limits of EWT to juries

  T - psychologists can improve the legal system and protect innocent people from faulty convictions due to unreliable EWT
• counterpoint to the strength 'practical use in criminal justice system': P - application of EWT is affected by research

  E - Loftus and palmer - pps watched film clips in lab which is less stressful than real event

  Rachel foster 1994 said that what EW remember has consequences but in research it doesn't matter

  T - lofter was too pessimistic - EWT may be dependable
• weaknesses: P - EWT = more accurate for some events than others: E - sutherland and trayne 2001 showed pps a video, when asked misleading Q's, recall was more accurate for central details than peripheral ones so their memory is resistant to misleading info because attention is focused on central features

  T - original memories for central details were not distorted (not predicted by substitution explanation)
• weaknesses: P - evidence that post event discussion actually alters EWT: E - skagerberg and wright 2008 showed pps film clips with 2 versions, they discussed in pairs and reported a blend of the 2 e.g medium brown hair instead of light or dark