Eyewitness Testimony - Misleading Information

• Leading Questions - Investigation

  -Loftus + Palmer 1974 - car crash speed estimate

  -ppts viewed car crash videos same vid for standardization asked crucial question - 'how fast were the cars going when they _ each other' verb replaced with differing severity from contacted to bumped to crashed to hit to smashed more intense verbs = higher estimates eg contacted was 31.8mph and smashed was 40.5mph
• Leading Questions - Explanations

  Response Bias- no effect on actual memory, leading qs just prompt ppt to go along with interviewer- usually due to demand characteristics in experiments

  Memory substitution- evidenced by 2nd Loftus and Palmer in 1974 - followed up on smashed group - more likely to report seeing glass in video when there was none - suggests critical verb altered ppts memory of the videos
• Post Event Discussion - Investigation

  Gabbert et al 2003 - video of crime from different pov in matching pairs

  Each ppt could see video from different angle and therefore details the other couldnt see - both discussed what they saw then did individual recall tests If conferred, 71% of info learned from other eyewitness was incorrect, but in control with no discussion, 0% was incorrect This is evidence of memory conformity
• Post Event Discussion - Explanations

  Memory Contamination- when discuss- memories are actually altered as they combine misinformation

  Memory Conformity - Gabbert concluded that many go along with others because they think they are 'more right' or to earn social approval - but original memory still retained unchanged
• A03 - Real - world application of EWT

  +Research into MI has crucial value in judicial system

  Inaccurate EWT case-changing -police have to be careful how they phrase interview questions

  Psychologists can appear in court to explain limitations of EWT

  so can improve the justice system, protect innocent people from faulty convictions

  Counter: -Research limitations -L+P - clips in lab different from IRL -Foster concluded EWT remember info if it is important and has consequences in real life but in research are less motivated so L+P are too pessimistic - EWT can be more dependable
• A03 - Evidence against Substitution (Leading Questions)

  -EWT more accurate for some aspects rather than others

  Sutherland and Hayne 2001 - recall after leading q was better / more accurate for central details than periphery ones

  Attention focused on main details so more resistant to leading questions and misleading info

  Original memories for central details survived and not distorted which isn't predicted by Memory Substitution theory
• A03 - Evidence challenging Memory Conformity (PED)

  -PED actually alters EWT

  -Skagerberg + Wright 2008- 2 versions of mugging where hair was either dark or light brown

  Found ppts didn't repeat the other but instead blended memory into a medium brown

  Memory itself is distorted through contamination by PED rather than a result of memory conformity