According to literature, older adults commonly experience decrease in memory storage. Along with that, unfortunately, they become more vulnerable victims to crime, which means they more than likely to have to provide testimony for investigation process. The current study intended to examine whether older adult have higher tendency to use their prior knowledge than younger adult and how it actually affect the accuracy and confidence of the recall result.
The study employed mixed factorial design 2 (younger vs older adult) X 2 (high vs low typicality of the action) X 2 (immediate vs delay retrieval). It involved 96 students; 50 young adults and 46 older adults. So, first they were asked to watch video on bank robbery followed with questions …show more content…
Thus, this altered function can cause someone to be involved in any inappropriate activities, including crime. Research by Harvey, Kneller, and Campbell assess alcohol effect on visual attention and eyewitness testimony. They hypothesized that intoxicated participants spend less time fixating on peripheral region of crime images in comparison to sober ones. They also hypothesized that less information recognized from image regions receiving fewer gaze fixations. Last, they hypothesized that intoxicated participants are less able to identify the perpetrator in comparison to sober …show more content…
The study involved 22 participants, were divided into two groups; individual and co-witness. Within the conditions half participants watch version A of video and half watch the B version. The study began with 90 s crime video that followed by questionnaire to rehearse their memory. They performed this task base on the group; half in individual setting and half in group setting. Participants in group setting were asked to work in the questionnaire together with the group and have collaborative answer. Next unrelated task for 30 minutes that followed by recall task individually, they also need to state their level of confidence. After 4 weeks they were asked to come back for next part of the study. First they were given chance to look over their statement for 10 minutes and the cross-examination started. For the study purpose the cross examination goal was to make the participants change their statement, the method used by the interview were ones that actually use in the real trial process.
Seventy-three percent of participants in the co-witness were incorporated at least one answer from their group to theirs. The statement accuracy dropped after cross examination. accuracy was higher in individual condition than co-witness condition in the first recall. But, participants in the individual condition also changed their
The study employed mixed factorial design 2 (younger vs older adult) X 2 (high vs low typicality of the action) X 2 (immediate vs delay retrieval). It involved 96 students; 50 young adults and 46 older adults. So, first they were asked to watch video on bank robbery followed with questions …show more content…
Thus, this altered function can cause someone to be involved in any inappropriate activities, including crime. Research by Harvey, Kneller, and Campbell assess alcohol effect on visual attention and eyewitness testimony. They hypothesized that intoxicated participants spend less time fixating on peripheral region of crime images in comparison to sober ones. They also hypothesized that less information recognized from image regions receiving fewer gaze fixations. Last, they hypothesized that intoxicated participants are less able to identify the perpetrator in comparison to sober …show more content…
The study involved 22 participants, were divided into two groups; individual and co-witness. Within the conditions half participants watch version A of video and half watch the B version. The study began with 90 s crime video that followed by questionnaire to rehearse their memory. They performed this task base on the group; half in individual setting and half in group setting. Participants in group setting were asked to work in the questionnaire together with the group and have collaborative answer. Next unrelated task for 30 minutes that followed by recall task individually, they also need to state their level of confidence. After 4 weeks they were asked to come back for next part of the study. First they were given chance to look over their statement for 10 minutes and the cross-examination started. For the study purpose the cross examination goal was to make the participants change their statement, the method used by the interview were ones that actually use in the real trial process.
Seventy-three percent of participants in the co-witness were incorporated at least one answer from their group to theirs. The statement accuracy dropped after cross examination. accuracy was higher in individual condition than co-witness condition in the first recall. But, participants in the individual condition also changed their