Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Factors Affecting
Eyewitness Testimony
- The role of emotion
- when someone either witnesses or
is the victim of a crime, they are
liable to feel intense emotions
- fear and anger being the main 2
- Deffenbacher (2004) found that high stress
had a negative impact on accuracy
- Christianson and Hubinette (1993)
found that witnesses to real bank
robberies who had been
threatened had better recall than
onlookers who were not involved
- however, MacLeod (1986) compared
real life eyewitness reports of 379
physical assaults with crime where no
physical injury occurred
- found that there was no overall difference in
accuracy between the 2 types of crime
- Flashbulb memories
- vivid, long-lasting memories
which occur at times of
heightened emotion
- EG. JFK's assassination
and 9/11
- however, Talarico and Rubin
(2003) found that consistency for
flashbulb memories and everyday
memories do not differ
- however, PP's rated their
recall of 9/11 as being much
more vivid, and had a greater
confidence in its accuracy
- Nolan and Markham (1998)
found that confident witnesses
were seen as more accurate than
unsure witnesses, even though
the actual accuracy may not differ
- Weapon focus
- research has suggested that
witnesses often focus on a weapon
at the expense of other details
- Johnson and Scott (1978) had PP's
witness a man carrying a knife with
blood whilst waiting for an experiment,
and other PP's saw a man carrying a
pen covered in grease
- 49% of PP's with the 'pen'
could identify the man, 33%
with the 'knife' could identify
- Reconstructive memory:
Leading questions
- leading questions affect recall
because they provide 'post event'
info which is integrated with info
of the original perception
- a criticism of Loftus+Palmer's
study is that judging speed is
complex, therefore PP's are
more prone to being led by
leading questions
- Loftus+Zanni (1975) - asked one
group "Did you see A broken
headlight" and the other "Did you
see THE broken headlight"
- 7% reported they saw "A broken headlight",
17% said they saw "THE broken headlight"
- demonstrates that leading questions can
actually cause PP's to remember
something that was not there
- however, Loftus (1979) used
leading questions to try and alter
PP's recall of the colour of a purse
- PP's persisted in describing the purse as red
- much research is highly
artificial as it takes place
under lab conditions
- issues with
generalisability
- Yullie and Cuthshall
(1986) showed that the
effect of leading
questions is diminished
in real life situations
- however, research into the effect of
leading questions has led to the
development of the cognitive interview
- used by the police, structured in a
way that avoids leading questions to
maintain accuracy of EWT