Eyewitness Testimony & Misleading Information

• What is eyewitness testimony?

  An account given by witnesses of an event
• What factors can affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony?

  Misleading information and anxiety
• What is misleading information?

  Incorrect information given after an event
• What are the two types of misleading information?

  Leading questions and post-event discussion
• What defines a leading question?

  A question suggesting a desired answer
• What is the response-bias explanation?

  It influences the response without changing memory
• What does the substitution explanation suggest?

  It actually changes the memory of the event
• What would indicate the substitution explanation is true?

  Participants remember false details from the event
• What was the aim of Loftus & Palmer's 1974 study?

  To investigate leading questions' effect on testimony
• How many American students participated in Loftus & Palmer's study?

  45 American students
• What did participants in Loftus & Palmer's study watch?

  A video of a car crash
• What did Loftus and Palmer manipulate in their study?

  The verb used in the speed question
• What were the five verbs used in Loftus & Palmer's study?

  Hit, contacted, bumped, collided, smashed
• What was the mean speed estimate for the verb 'contacted'?

  31.8 mph
• What was the mean speed estimate for the verb 'smashed'?

  40.5 mph
• What did Loftus (1975) find regarding the verb 'smashed'?

  Participants reported seeing broken glass
• What is post-event discussion?

  When witnesses discuss what they saw
• What was the critical finding about broken glass in Loftus's study?

  There was no broken glass in the video
• What are the two reasons post-event discussion affects testimony?

  Memory contamination and memory conformity
• What is memory contamination?

  Distortion from combining misinformation
• What is memory conformity?

  Witnesses go along for social approval
• What was the aim of Gabbert et al's 2003 study?

  To investigate post-event discussion effects
• How were participants studied in Gabbert et al's study?

  In pairs watching different video angles
• What percentage of participants recalled details they did not see in Gabbert et al's study?

  71%
• What was the control group's recall percentage in Gabbert et al's study?

  0%
• What are the real-world applications of research on misleading information?

  • Important for the criminal justice system
  • Police must phrase questions carefully
  • Protects innocent people from wrongful convictions
• What are the evaluation points regarding the validity of eyewitness testimony research?

  • Research responses may not reflect real-world consequences
  • Participants' responses in studies are less impactful
  • Eyewitness testimony may be more reliable than studies suggest
• What evidence challenges the substitution explanation?

  • Eyewitness testimony accuracy varies by event aspect
  • Central details are recalled more accurately than peripheral ones
  • Original memories for central details survive
• What evidence challenges memory conformity?

  • Participants reported a blend of answers
  • Memory distorted through contamination, not conformity
  • Misleading discussions affect recall accuracy
• What is a strength for Misleading Information affecting Eyewitness Testimony?

  Real World Application

  • Research regarding misleading information has important practical uses in the criminal justice system
  • Loftus (1975) believes that leading questions can have such a distorting effect on memory that police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their questions when interviewing eyewitnesses
  • This shows that psychologists can help to improve the way the legal system works, especially by protecting innocent people from faulty convictions based on unreliable eyewitness testimony
• What is a limitation for Misleading Information affecting Eyewitness Testimony?

  Low Validity in Research

  • The practical applications of eyewitness testimony are affected by issues with research
  • Foster et al (1994) points out that what eyewitnesses remember has important consequences in the real world, but participants’ responses in research do not matter in the same way
  • This suggests that researchers are too pessimistic about the effects of misleading information and eyewitness testimony may be more dependable that many studies suggest
• What is a limitation for Misleading Information affecting Eyewitness Testimony?

  Evidence Against Substitution

  • Eyewitness testimony is more accurate for some aspects of an event than for others
  • Sutherland & Hayne (2001) showed participants a clip and when later asked misleading questions, their recall was more accurate for central details of the event than peripheral ones
  • This suggests that the original memories for central details survived and were not distorted, which is not predicted by the substitution explanation
• What is a limitation for Misleading Information affecting Eyewitness Testimony?

  Evidence Challenging Memory Conformity

  • Skagerberg & Wright (2008) showed their participants film clips of which there were 2 versions
  • Participants discussed the clips in pairs, each having seen different versions, and reported a ‘blend’ of both answers
  • This suggests that the memory itself is distorted through contamination by misleading post-event discussion, rather than the result of memory conformity