Misleading Information On EWT AO3

• A criticism of this research is that it is artificial
• Loftus and Gabbert used film clips which is less anxiety-inducing than in real life
• If the car accident/crime had been viewed in real life, the EWT could have been more accurate, regardless of the misleading info
• In lab studies such as these, there is a real risk of demand characteristics which reduce validity
• In a lab study, there is a lack of consequences compared to real life
• In a court room, people would try to be more accurate than in a psychology experiment (FOSTER)
• There is a real-life application to this research
• If there is an understanding of what makes EWT inaccurate, the police can phrase their questions carefully
• This has led to the development of the Cognitive interview, which has been successful (Köhnken found a 41% increase in accurate info using it compared to standard police interview)
• Without misleading info given to witnesses, the justice system can run smarter
• There is some debate about whether memories are altered by misleading info
• Sutherland and Hayne found that even when given misleading questions, recall was still accurate for the central details of an event, which criticises the substitution explanation
• The effects of post-event discussion can be reduced if participants are warned of the effects (e.g. Bodner et al. 2009)
• This suggests that if the police are careful when interviewing, the negative effects of post-event discussion may not negatively affect the accuracy of EWT