Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
26 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Loftus and Palmer - Experiment 1 Method |
*45 students, 7 films of different traffic accidents *After each given a questionnaire with a critical question 'About how fast were the cars going when they ____ each other? *Smashed, collided, bumped, hit and contacted |
|
|
Loftus and Palmer Experiment 2 Results |
*The mean speed estimated was calculated *Word 'smashed' estimated around 41mph *Word 'contacted' estimated around 30mph |
|
|
Loftus and Palmer - Experiment 2 Method |
*3 groups and shown a 1 minute car accident *Group 1=smashed, group 2=hit and group 3=no question of speed *Return 1 week later asked 10 questions and the critical question 'Did you see any broken glass?' |
|
|
Loftus and Palmer - Experiment 2 Results |
*Participants gave higher estimate in condition 'smashed' and more likely to assume their was broken glass *Misleading post-event information changes the way information is stored |
|
|
Loftus et al - Supporting Evidence Method |
*Group 1 red datsun with a 'STOP' sign and Group 2 with a 'YIELD' sign *After all ppts given a set of questions, half of each group had question 'Did another car pass the red datsun when it was at the YIELD' and the others had STOP *Finally shown pairs of slides and had to identify if they were in the original sequence (one pair showed at a STOP another at a YIELD) |
|
|
Loftus et al - Supporting Evidence Results |
*75% of ppts who had consistent questions picked the correct slide *Misleading information affect recall as Loftus and Palmer showed |
|
|
Bekerian and Bowers |
*Replicated the stop/yield study *Gave the slides in the original order and found recall was now the same for the consistent and misleading groups *Memories intact despite the misleading information *Affects the retrieval rather than the storage |
|
|
Yuille and Cutshall |
*Interviewed 13 people who had witnessed an armed robbery in Canada *4 months after the crime with 2 misleading questions *Provided accurate recall not affect memory in real-life |
|
|
Individual Differences - Wells and Olsen's |
Review of EWT research concludes that although males and females may take an interest in different aspects of a scene the overall abilities is indistinguishable |
|
|
Deffenbacher et al |
*Meta-analysis of 18 studies looking into the effects of heightened anxiety on accuracy of EWT *High levels of stress negatively impacted on the accuracy of EWT |
|
|
Christianson and Hubinette |
*Questioned 58 real witnesses to a bank robbery *Those threatened in some way were more accurate in recall than those less emotionally aroused *True 15 months later |
|
|
Johnson and Scott/Loftus |
*Weapon-focus effect *2 conditions, man with a pen and grease on his hand, other arguing man with a knife and blood on his hand *ppts shown 50 photos *Condition 1: 49% and Condition 2: 33% |
|
|
Yerkes-Dodson Law |
*curvilinear *small to medium increases in arousal may increase the accuracy of memory *too high levels interfere with it |
|
|
Steblay/Loftus et al - AO2 |
*presence of a weapon does indeed reduce the chances of a witness correctly identifying the person holding it *Monitored EW eye movements and found that the presence of a weapon causes attention to be physically drawn towards the weapon itself |
|
|
Parker and Carranza |
*Primary and college students in ability to correctly identify a target individual following a mock crime *Children had higher rates of choosing than adults but were more likely to make errors |
|
|
Yarmey |
*651 adults in public asked to recall characteristics of a woman they had spoken to for 15 seconds 2 mins earlier *Young and middle aged were more condiment than olders but no difference in accuracy |
|
|
Memon et al |
*Accuracy of young and older EW's *When the delay between incident and identification was short (35mins) no difference in accuracy *When delayed by one week the older witnesses were significantly less accurate |
|
|
Anastasia and Rhodes - Own- Age Bias |
*Individuals from 3 ages were shown 24 photographs and asked to rate attractiveness *After a short filler they were shown 48 *Young and middle-aged ppts were more accurate than older participants but all age groups better with own age e.g. young=90% |
|
|
Brigham and Malpass (The differential experience) - Own-Age Bias Explained |
*Findings similar to own-race bias, more contact we have with our own age or race the better our memory would be *Individuals usually encounter member son their own age group and become more expert at processing those faces showing better memory for them |
|
|
Cognitive Interview - A01 |
Fisher and Geiselman 1. report everything 2. mental reinstatement of context 3. changing the order 4. changing the perspective |
|
|
Kohnken |
*53 studies and found a 34% increase in correct information from CI compared to SI *Most of these used volunteer witnesses in the lab |
|
|
Milne and Bull |
*Undergraduates and children *Inrerviewed using one component of CI compared against a control group told to 'try again' *Recall was similar across all 4 however when interviewed using report everything and mental reinstatement, CI recall was significantly higher |
|
|
Difficulty in establishing effectiveness |
*Hard to evaluate because not only one procedure but a collected of related techniques *Thames Valley Police use all other than changing perspectives *Others only report everything and 'mental reinstatement' (Kebbel and Wagstaff) |
|
|
Time Problems with CI |
*Policer officers suggest that CI requires more time than is normally available |
|
|
The enhanced CI |
Fisher and Geiselman have added more techniques which causes greater demand thus the quantity and quality has become a critical issue |
|
|
Stien and Memon |
*In Brazil (LEDC) current SI is interrogative *Women from a cleaning staff watched video of an abduction *Compared to SI produced more forensically rich information (CI) *Will increase the incidence of miscarriages of justice |
