1838040
| Pregunta | Respuesta |
| How frequent are wrongful convictions (percentage)? In WC cases, what percentage of cases result in the actual offender being convicted? | 0.5% - 5% 49% offenders found |
| Use three studies to illustrate the attitudes towards wrongful convictions? | WC's are seen as necessary for the promotion of justice and to some like William Blackstone, seen as absolutely unnecessary. Ricciardelli et al 2009 found that 200+ Canadian students reported low ratios of permissible wrongful convictions. 51% said there should be none and the lowest numbers came from Criminal justice final years in comparison to first year psychology students. Zalman et al 2012, 190+ Michigan adults said that the regularity of WC's warrants for policy change in criminal justice system. Majority were white. Clow and Leach 2013 found that WC's were still stigmatised as an offender, lazy, unfriendly etc. Critique: Survey method, limited demographic of samples. |
| What are the causes of wrongful convictions according to Rattner? What two pieces of research support the number one cause of wrongful convictions? | The causes of WC range from eyewitness misidentification (52%), testimony errors, forensic errors, misconduct, framing/snitching. The Devlin report showed that 12% of convictions were made solely on witness identification. Loftus' crime vignette study showed that we trust eyewitness testimonies even when we see that it is unreliable. |
| Specifically in the Encoding stage, what can make an eyewitness unreliable? Use studies to support. Think about critiques for the studies. | Encoding Event conditions: Distance, visibility, weapon focus (Loftus, novelty effects as critique), exposure time, violence etc. Encoding Witness conditions: Anxiety (London dungeon - Valentine 2009), Race (Bringham 2001), personality, alcohol. Critique is that for some factors, the evidence is inconclusive. Some have shown that increased violence weakens performance, whereas others found no effect. Likewise for anxiety. |
| Specifically in the Storage and retrieval stages, what can make an eyewitness unreliable? What are the best conditions for retrieval? | Storage: Post-event information, expectations and schema. Retrieval: Who is asking, how are they asking, consequences of answer, hypnosis. The best conditions for retrieval are to elicit the same environment that the memory was coded in. |
| What mnemonic due UK police use to determine the reliability of witnesses and who is the mnemonic based on? | Turnball ADVOKATE Amount of time under observation, Distance, Visibility, Obstruction, Known or seen before, Any reason for remembering suspect, Time, Error |
| What is the misinformation effect? | The misinformation effect is when someone's memory is distorted/altered/inaccessible after post event information is presented to them. |
| What framework to misinformation tests use? | Post event information that is congruent or incongruent to what the individual saw is presented and errors in recall for the incongruent/misled group are recorded for a misinformation percentage. |
| What is wrong with the old misinformation framework, who critiqued it and how have the tests been improved/modified? | McCloskey and Zaragoza said that Loftus' framework contained guessing artefacts which introduced misinformation acceptance. They modified the test by introducing a forced choice with one of the options being a novel item. Eg. Ss shown coke but told that they were presented with 7up (mininformation) they were later given a choice between coke and sunkist (novel) to eliminate misinformation acceptance. |
| What are the two hypothesis concerning misinformation an what are their implications? | Trace impairment hypothesis - memory is altered, overwritten, replaced. Coexistence hypothesis - memory is inaccessible or less accessible, difficult to retrieve. Implications: can we find the original memory by using the right interviewing techniques? |
| Who is more susceptible to misinformation effects according to Frenda et al? | Those who see themselves as forgetful. Those with low cognitive ability and harm avoidance, agreeableness personality traits (Zhu et al 2009) Those who have their misinformation confirmed by DNA evidence. |
| What interview technique is used to prevent the misinformation effect? Evidence supporting the technique? | The cognitive interview. Encourages; free-recall, change perspective, no guessing, develop rapport etc. Memon et al - showed Ss video of robbery - some interview with CI, others with free response and leading questions. Recall was more accurate with CI. |
| What is memory conformity and co-witness misinformation? How common are co-witnesses according to Patterson and Kemp (%)? What key study was done on co-witness misinformation? | When post-event information is presented by another witness and when one's memory conforms to that of the co-witness. 86% Gabbert et al 2003, showed participants a video with different perspectives. They were to discuss it and recall separately. 86% included their co-witnesses statement in theirs. |
| What amplifies memory conformity or co-witness information? | Relationship to co-witness - more likely to conform to romantic partner than a stranger (French et al) Source credibility - older person, occupation, informative influence etc. Schema - it makes sense. It fits into what is expected. |
| Often imaginations, thoughts and dreams are mistaken for actual memories, what is the name of the framework that aims to explain this and who is it by? | Source monitoring (Johnson et al, 1993) |
| What is the process of attribution (CAPS) in source monitoring? | Contextual (temporal spatial) Affective (feelings, emotions) Perceptual (smell, taste, touch) Semantic (meaningful) |
| In Johnson et al's study, what was the main difference between those told to recall a recent social event versus childhood memories versus an imagined event. | The recent event had more perceptual qualities recalled than the childhood event or imagined event. Childhood events were even likened to imagined events because of the characteristics of the recall. |
| What is the main criticism of the source monitoring framework? Who criticised it? | That it is a framework and not a theory because it is non-falsifiable. It is extremely parsimonious. Reyman and Lloyd criticised it. |
| What percentage of innocent people are chosen in a line up? What did Buckhouts study show? | 20% 75% of people in the 1980s selected an innocent person when a crime was shown on TV and they were asked to call in after a line-up was shown. |
| In forensic research what is a system variable? What is an estimator variable? | A system variable is one that you can manipulate, eg. number of people in a line-up. Estimator variable is one that you cannot control. E.g. number of time individual got to see the suspect, feeling of stress etc. |
| In a police lineup, what is a target and what is a foil? What are the requirements in the UK and US concerning number of foils in a line up? | Target = suspect/perpetrator Foil = innocent filler The UK requires 8 The US has no minimum, but usually 4 (live) to 5 (photos). |
| What is the Relative Judgement Process? How does Wells illustrate the RJP? | In simultaneous line ups, people tend to make their choice based on familiarity relative to what is available. Participants viewed a staged crime. Shown 5 suspects. 54% pick number 3 which was correct in the Target present line up. When the target was absent, the initial percentage for those that selected the other suspects went up. For example, number 2 went from 13% to 38%. |
| The relative judgement process is a case for s____________ line-ups. But what is the problem with s____________ lineups? | Sequential line-ups. The problem is that they illicit a forced choice artefact. People in sequential line-ups are less likely to pick 'no one'. Which can be problematic. |
| What is the correlation between Accuracy and Confidence? Why are the two so important? | r=.29 (weak, closer to 0) It is important because convictions have been made on witness confidence ratings. |
| Is confidence an indicator of accuracy? What did Wells et al 2002 say in their review paper? | Confidence is not an indicator of accuracy. Wells said, that one can repeatedly question someone on their erroneous report but it would not make them more accurate. |
| What increases confidence? | Feedback, e.g. detective saying 'good', or 'i thought so too' |
| What is wrong with using correlations for Accuracy and Confidence? What method is better? | Correlation does not imply causation. Correlations are simply a line of best fit, does not explain the variation in individuals. When variation is allowed, we get meaningful correlations and not artificial ones. Calibration method (Juslin et al and Brewer) is better. Correlation between confidence and probability of being correct, to give measures of under confidence and over confidence. |
| What is a functional size in a line up? | The number witnesses divided by the number of correct choices. eg. 100 witnesses, 20 correct. Functional size is 5. |
| What are the things that can affect lineup selection? | Schema Looking like a criminal Post event information Type of foils presented |
| Which one is better for the selection of foils - suspect resemblance strategy or culprit description strategy? | Culprit description is better as it selects foils based on how the witness described the suspect. It protects the innocent without compromising judicial standards and has shown to be more effective in the selection of correct targets. |
| What 4 guidelines are used to ensure that lineups are conducted correctly? | 1. Double blind for the person conducting the line-up and the witness. 2. Witness should be forewarned that the suspect may be absent. 3. Culprit description strategy to be used for selection of foils. 4. Confidence recorded at time of ID. |
| What did Kebell find in his review of the lineup guidelines in the UK? What is the main issue faced by UK police officers concerning the practicality of the guidelines? | The UK are good at upholding the guidelines. Shows that is is applicable and practical to follow. The main issue faced is the lack of human resources and some feds find it time consuming. They overcame this by having VIPER line up system. |
¿Quieres crear tus propias Fichas gratiscon GoConqr? Más información.