Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Memory Mindmap - Coggle Diagram
Memory Mindmap
Factors affecting accuracy of Eyewitness Testimony (EWT)
Misleading information - post event discussion
When witnesses to a crime discuss the events with others (including other witnesses), their memories can become contaminated
Memory conformity - we may change or alter our memories based on what our friends say, in order to not disagree with the majority group
Repeat interviewing & reconstructive nature of memory - if we are persistently questioned on what happened, particularly by authority, we may alter our memories of the event
Every time a witness is questioned, they have to reconstruct the event in their mind
Retroactive interference & source monitoring - if we see an event in the media, it can make us think about it in a different way
Anxiety
There are 3 factors to consider when looking at how anxiety can affect the accuracy of EWT
The weapons focus effect
Increased violence
The anxiety level of the witness (Yerkes-Dodson Law)
Witnesses may be in a high state of arousal (ie anxious & stressed) particularly if there is threat / danger
Suggests that memory operates best at a moderate level of anxiety, but high anxiety leads to a lower level of recall
Most victims will experience high levels of anxiety during a criminal act
Misleading information - leading questions
Leading questions are questions that guide a person towards a specific response instead of letting them answer freely
Examples of leading questions
'You didn't see any young people, did you?'
'You never came home that night, right?'
'Did you see the man in the black coat'
Research into factors affecting EWT
Post event discussion
Gabbert et al (2003)
Investigated the effect of post-event discussion on the accuracy of EWT. Her sample consisted of 60 students from the university of Aberdeen and 60 older adults recruited from a local community
Participants watched a video of a girl stealing money from a wallet and were either tested individually or in pairs. Those in pairs were told they had both watched the same video but from different perspectives and that only one person witnessed the girl stealing
Gabbert et al. found that 71% of the witnesses in the co-witness group recalled information they had not actually seen and 60% said that the girl was guilty, despite the fact that they had not seen her commit a crime, highlighting the issue of post-event discussion and memory contamination harming the accuracy of EWT
Anxiety
Johnson & Scott (1976)
Condition 1) In the 'no weapon' condition, person walks by with his hands covered in grease holding a pen
Condition 2) In the 'weapon condition', argument overheard, someone runs past holding a bloodied letter opener
49% identified the pen whereas 33% identified the letter opener as a knife
Supports the 'weapons focus' effect
Loftus & Burns (1982)
Asked participants to watch a video of a violent or a non-violent bank robbery. As the robbers run out, they run into a group of boys playing basketball. One of the questions asked after the video relates to the number on the back of one of the boys' jersey (17)
Violent condition had 4% recall for the jersey number whereas non-violent condition had 27.9% recall for the jersey number
HOWEVER
In real-life situations the EWT seemed very accurate even though the witnesses were highly anxious
Deffenbacher et al. (2004)
High stress negatively impacts eyewitness memory, supporting the idea that high levels of stress can impair both a witness' ability to identify a perpetrator and their ability to remember details about the crime
META-ANALYSIS OF 63 STUDIES
Yuille & Cutshall (1982)
Participant watched a film of a bank robbery under 1 of 2 conditions
Violent condition - showed a boy being shot in the face
Non-violent condition - same video but without the violent ending
Memory test - after watching, participants were tested on their memory for details before the ending incident
Those who saw the violent ending had significantly poorer memory for the details leading up to the shooting compared to those who saw the non-violent version
Leading questions
Loftus & Palmer
Procedure: 45 American students forming an opportunity sample. Lab experiment with 5 conditions, only one of which was experienced by each participant. Participants then watched a video of a car accident and were asked to determine the speed of the car
Findings:
Smashed: 40.8 mph
Collided: 39.3 mph
Bumped: 38.1 mph
Hit: 34 mph
Contacted: 31.8 mph
Conclusion: connotations of the verb used altered the memory by creating an impression
Loftus & Zanni (1975) showed a video of a bank robbery to participants. They then asked participants if they saw 'a' knife or if they saw 'the' knife
By changing the definite determiner, participants who were asked 'the' were more likely to report seeing something rather than those who were asked 'a'
Improving the accuracy of EWT: the Cognitive Interview
Fischer & Gieselman (1985, 1992)
The 4 techniques
Changing perspective
The witness is asked to describe the event from another person's viewpoint
This is important as witnesses may fill in blanks based on what they expect to happen in a situation because of their own schemas and their own egocentrism. By changing the perspective, it may reduce this from happening and reduce dishonesty
Context reinstatement
Witness is encouraged to recall the environment & emotional context of the event
This is important as it can help witnesses retrieve forgotten memories by giving them contextual and emotional cues from when the event happened to trigger enhanced recall of events
Changing order
The witness recounts the event in a different order than it occured
This is important as witnesses can fill in blanks based on what they expect to happen in a situation because of their schemas, reducing the accuracy of testimony. By changing the order around, it may prevent this from happening, reducing dishonesty
Report everything
The witness is asked to report every detail they matter, no matter how seemingly insignificant
This is important as memories are often connected, so by recalling an irrelevant piece of information, it may then cue a whole lot of additional evidence useful for investigations
The cognitive interview is a procedure used by police when interviewing witnesses to crime. Although it typically takes longer than a standard police interview, it can lead to an increase in accuracy that can enhance EWT
The Enhanced Cognitive Interview was developed by Fischer and focuses on the social dynamics of the interaction
Active listening
Develop rapport
Open questions
Minimising distractions
Pause after each response
Avoid interruptions
Listen to witness
Detailed responses
Explanations for Forgetting
Failure due to absence of cues
This theory states that forgetting arises due to an absence of cues that were present at the time of encoding, but not during recall
Main assumptions of retrieval failure due to absence of cues
A retrieval cue is a piece of information in the individual's cognitive environment at the time of encoding that matches the time of recall
A memory trace is laid down and retained in a memory store as a result of the original perception of the event, complete with its surroundings
Tulving's Encoding Specificity Principle
'the greatest dissimilarity between the encoding event and retrieval event, the greater the likelihood of forgetting an original memory.
This is because of a mismatch of information that presents problems accessing stored memories in LTM. He went on to explain the different types of cues
Absence of state cues - internal condition, when mood or physiological state during recall is different that when you were learning
Absence of context cues - surroundings / location, time of day etc
Interference Theory
As new information is learnt, cognitive connections can be confused, especially if the information is similar to old information that we already have
When material is similar, it creates 'response competition' during recall, which can distort our recollections and lead to forgetting
Types of interference
Retroactive Interference
Recent memories interfering with previous memories eg trying to remember the names of your old psychology class but only remembering your new class
Proactive Interference
Previous memories interfering with recent memories eg learning names of people in your new psychology class, but only being able to remember names of people in your old clas
