Accuracy of eyewitness testimony - Misleading Information

    Cards (6)

    • Key Study - Misleading information on accuracy of eyewitness testimony ( Experiment 1 ):
      • Loftus & Palmer (1974)
      • 45 participants split into 5 groups
      • Shown a clip of a car accident and asked "How fast were the cars going when they '_' into each other?"
      • Verbs were smashed, collided, hit, bumped or contacted
      • Pts given smashed gave an average speed of 40.8, pts given contacted said 31.8
      • Demonstrates how leading questions affects the response
    • Key Study - Misleading information on accuracy of eyewitness testimony (Experiment 2 ) :
      • Loftus & Palmer (1974)
      • Aim: to find out if leading questions bias a participant's response or actually cause information to be altered before it's stored
      • 150 participants split into 3 groups shown a clip of a car accident
      • Same as first experiment, verbs used were hit & smashed, & also a control group
      • A week later, participants were asked if there was any broken glass
      • From the smashed group, 16 said yes. In the hit group, 7 people said yes
      • Leading questions change the actual memory
    • Types of misleading information:
      • Leading questions
      • Post-event discussion
    • Post event discussion affect accuracy of eyewitness testimony:
      Post event discussion may contaminate eyewitness memory of an event
      Conformity effect - participants recollection influenced by discussion with others
      Repeat interviewing - each time a witness is interviewed there is the possibility that the interviewer may use leading questions or their comments affect their recollection
    • Accuracy of eyewitness testimony - misleading information AO3:
      • Real world application - highlights problems of eyewitnesses as evidence. Is the largest factor contributing to false convictions
      • Individual differences - elderly people are more likely to be affected by misleading information
      • Artificial - in real life, responses are more accurate as participants are emotionally aroused & take it seriously - lack of ecological validity
    • Accuracy of eyewitness testimony - misleading information AO3:
      • Real world application
      • Individual differences
      • Artificial
    See similar decks