EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY AND RECONTRUCTIVE MEMORY
Much of our personal identity is grounded in our memories—fragments of our past woven into the fabric of who we are. These recollections, like threads in a tapestry, define our experiences, shape our perceptions, and tether us to the essence of our being. They are the narrative of our lives, the repository of our joys and sorrows, victories and defeats.
Yet, when research reveals that memories are not mere snapshots of reality, but rather delicate constructions, liable to distortion and embellishment, it casts a shadow of doubt upon the very foundation of our existence. We hold onto our memories as if they were immutable truths, yet they are but interpretations, subject to the whims of time and the vagaries of perception
RECONSTRUCTIVE MEMORY
Have you ever experienced a vivid memory that you later discovered was inaccurate or impossible?
Reconstructive memory involves the active reconstruction of past events during recall, rather than retrieving memories as one would play back a video. This process sees individuals piecing together the past through a blend of cognitive mechanisms, such as prior knowledge, expectations, beliefs, and personal experiences, rather than accessing a direct and unaltered record of what happened
Several factors contribute to the reconstructive nature of memory:
SCHEMAS:
A schema acts as a cognitive blueprint or structure that assists in processing and making sense of new information by integrating it with previous experiences and knowledge. This mental framework significantly influences the way individuals perceive new data, memories, and perceptions by categorising them into established knowledge systems.
During the process of memory recall, individuals often depend on their pre-existing schemas to navigate gaps and interpret information that may be incomplete or not entirely clear. Schemas provide a context that helps in reconstructing memories, enabling people to piece together details that might not be fully remembered. By relying on these cognitive frameworks, the brain effectively fills in missing parts of a memory with information that seems consistent with what is already known or what might have been expected to occur. This mechanism underscores the reconstructive nature of memory, highlighting how our recollections are not mere replicas of past events but are shaped and coloured by the lenses of our accumulated experiences and the schemas we've developed from them.
EXAMPLE:
Imagine visiting a zoo and later trying to recall the details of the day. Your schema for "zoo visits" might include expectations like seeing various animals, hearing children's excitement, and eating snacks. If you don't clearly remember what you ate, your schema might lead you to fill in this gap with a common zoo food, such as popcorn or ice cream, even if you actually had something different. This example shows how schemas guide memory recall, helping to reconstruct the day's events by filling in gaps with plausible details based on past experiences and general knowledge of what happens at zoo
CULTURAL SCHEMAS: :Cultural norms and expectations deeply influence the process of reconstructive memory, particularly in how narratives are perceived and remembered. Western cultures, for instance, have established norms around storytelling that dictate a specific structure: a narrative should have a beginning, middle, conflict resolution, and a definitive ending. This structured approach not only guides the creation of stories but also sets the framework within which audiences come to interpret and value narratives. Such expectations form a cultural schema that shapes the anticipation of narrative closure.
The film "Leave the World Behind," with its abrupt and ambiguous conclusion, serves as a poignant example to illustrate the clash between these established cultural schemas and narrative experimentation. In the context of Western storytelling traditions, where a clear resolution is often expected and valued, an open-ended conclusion can disrupt audience expectations, leading to confusion or dissatisfaction. This reaction is a direct result of a cultural schema that has been challenged; the memory of the film, therefore, may be reconstructed with a focus on its perceived lack of closure, influenced by the viewer's cultural expectations for narrative endings.
However, this expectation of narrative closure is not a universal standard. Many non-Western cultures favour storytelling forms that may emphasise cyclical narratives, moral lessons, or deliberate ambiguity, reflecting a variety of values and philosophical perspectives. Within these cultural contexts, stories do not necessarily adhere to a linear trajectory or culminate in clear resolutions. Ambiguity and open-ended-ness are often embraced, seen as reflective of life's inherent complexities and as invitations for personal interpretation.
In these cultures, the schemas surrounding storytelling and narrative interpretation differ significantly from those in Western contexts. As such, when individuals from these cultures encounter narratives with ambiguous endings, their reconstructive memory process is influenced by different expectations. Rather than experiencing confusion or dissatisfaction, they may reconstruct the memory of such narratives with an appreciation for the ambiguity, aligning with their cultural norms that do not demand definitive conclusions
EXPECTATION SCHEMAS: Expectations significantly influence the process of reconstructive memory, largely because they are rooted in pre-existing schemas. Expectations act as a result of these pre-set schemas, providing a template against which new information is compared and integrated. When recalling an event, the brain does not simply retrieve a perfect, unchanged record. Instead, memory reconstruction involves piecing together fragments of the original experience with relevant information stored in schemas, including our expectations. This means that what we remember is often a blend of what actually happened and what our schemas lead us to believe should have happened.
For example, if someone has a schema that associates dogs with being friendly, their expectation might lead them to reconstruct a memory of a first encounter with a dog as more positive, potentially downplaying or even forgetting moments of initial fear or apprehension. This reconstruction is influenced by the expectation (rooted in the schema) that dogs are friendly, demonstrating how expectations can alter the content and emotional tone of memories.
The influence of expectations on reconstructive memory is also evident in more complex scenarios, such as eyewitness testimony. If an eyewitness has an expectation about how a crime typically occurs, based on movies or previous knowledge, this schema can influence their memory of witnessing an actual crime. They may unconsciously adjust their recollection to fit their expectation of what should have happened, affecting the accuracy of their testimony.
Expectations can also lead to the incorporation of post-event information into memories. If individuals are exposed to information after an event that aligns with their expectations, they might be more likely to integrate this information into their recollection, even if it did not occur. This process further demonstrates how schemas and the expectations they generate play a critical role in reconstructive memory, shaping not only how we remember past events but also how we interpret and give meaning to those memories
POST EVENT DISCUSSION: Post-event discussion refers to any details or data that a person encounters after an initial event has occurred, which can subsequently become integrated into their memory of that original event. This phenomenon illustrates the malleability of human memory, highlighting how subsequent experiences can alter or distort our recollections.
When an individual is exposed to new information after an event—through conversations, media reports, or other means—this information can merge with their existing memories. As a result, the person might recall the event differently, incorporating details that were not actually experienced firsthand but were learned later. This integration process can significantly affect the accuracy of the memory, leading to recollections that reflect a blend of actual observations and post-event information.
The impact of post-event information on memory has profound implications, particularly in legal contexts. For example, eyewitness testimony can be influenced by discussions with other witnesses, media coverage, or police interviews. If an eyewitness is exposed to misleading information after witnessing a crime, their memory of the crime can become distorted, potentially leading to incorrect recollections of the event or identification of suspects.
LEADING QUESTIONS: The way questions are phrased during the process of memory retrieval plays a critical role in shaping the details that an individual remembers about an event. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the case of leading questions, which are queries that, either intentionally or unintentionally, suggest a specific answer or contain information that the questioner is aiming to have confirmed. The influence of leading questions on memory recall can result in significant distortions, where the details remembered may be altered, added, or omitted based on the suggestions embedded within the questions.
Leading questions work by introducing new elements into an individual's memory of an event or by emphasizing certain aspects over others. For instance, asking, "Was the car red when you saw the accident?" presupposes that there was a car involved and that it was red, potentially leading a witness to recall a red car even if they did not originally notice or remember the color of any vehicle involved. The individual's memory can be contaminated by this suggestion, merging the information from the question with their original memory, which can then lead to a distorted recollection.
The impact of leading questions on memory distortion is of particular concern in legal settings, such as police interviews, depositions, and courtroom testimonies, where accurate memory recall is crucial. Memory distortion can lead to false confessions, incorrect eyewitness identifications, and unjust convictions, highlighting the need for meticulously formulated questions that avoid suggesting specific answers
EMOTIONAL STATE AT THE TIME OF MEMORY: Emotions at the time of encoding and retrieval can impact the way memories are reconstructed. Emotional memories, in particular, may be subject to biases based on the emotional state during recall.
Emotions play a crucial role in how memories are formed and recalled. For example, if someone is scared during a robbery, that fear can intensify and possibly distort their memory of the event. The heightened emotional state makes certain details stand out more, while others might be forgotten or misremembered. Similarly, the stress experienced while witnessing an accident could result in a fragmented or selective memory of the event, emphasizing the chaos over sequential details. Conversely, happiness at a wedding can enhance and embellish memories, making the day seem even more joyful in retrospect. This phenomenon illustrates how the emotions felt during an event can significantly affect the accuracy and vividness of memory recall.
CONFIRMATION BIAS: Individuals may be more susceptible to confirmation bias, where they are more likely to remember and report details that confirm their feelings or beliefs about the event, potentially ignoring or misremembering conflicting information.
RUMINATION: Individuals may ruminate over an event, which can alter their memory of it. Repeatedly thinking about the event can lead to changes in how it is remembered, often embellishing or diminishing certain aspects of the memory.
HOW SCHEMAS CHANGE MEMORIES
FREDERICK BARLETT
Sir Frederic Bartlett, a British psychologist, conducted groundbreaking research on reconstructive memory in the 1930s. One of his most influential works is outlined in his book "Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology," published in 1932. Bartlett's experiments explored how cultural factors, individual differences, and the reconstructive nature of the recall process influence memory.
SCHEMA THEORY:
Bartlett's work laid the foundation for the development of schema theory. He proposed that memory is not a replica of past events but is influenced by cognitive frameworks or schemas—organised structures of knowledge that guide the interpretation of new information.
Schemas help individuals make sense of the world, but they can also lead to memory distortions as people actively reconstruct information to fit their existing cognitive frameworks
One of the key types of experiments that Bartlett conducted involved presenting participants with ambiguous drawings of objects, such as unfamiliar tribal artifacts or abstract geometric shapes. Participants were then asked to reproduce or describe these drawings after a delay.
Bartlett found that participants tended to transform the ambiguous drawings to fit their existing schemas or mental frameworks. For example, when asked to reproduce a drawing of an unfamiliar tribal mask, participants might inadvertently alter the details to make it resemble a more familiar object, such as a face or animal mask. This process of transformation reflected the participants' attempts to make sense of the ambiguous stimuli by imposing familiar structures onto them.
Bartlett's research on interpreting ambiguous drawings illustrates that when individuals encounter AN AMBIGUOUS image, they instinctively relate them to familiar schemata.
Bartlett's research on interpreting ambiguous drawings demonstrates that when individuals encounter an ambiguous image, they instinctively relate it to familiar schemata. This discovery underscores the crucial role of schemas as essential frameworks for storing and comprehending information; you can't store a memory that can't be labelled or identified. Schemas are also key in deciphering unfamiliar information. Faced with something novel, we automatically attempt to categorize it based on existing knowledge. If it doesn't fit into any known category, we experience confusion, as our inability to identify or label the new stimulus leaves us at a loss. This highlights the significance of schemas in our cognitive processes, allowing us to classify and understand new experiences
THE WAR OF THE GHOSTS
To demonstrate how prior knowledge or schematic knowledge influences memory, Bartlett (1932) conducted a study focusing on the impact of existing knowledge frameworks on memory recall. By selecting a narrative that was likely unfamiliar and culturally distinct to his participants, Bartlett introduced a strategic element of conflict between the content of the story and the participants' schemas, or cognitive frameworks. The chosen narrative, "The War of the Ghosts," a Native American folk tale, provided material rich in cultural specifics that were foreign to the English participants in his study.
THE STORY
“"One night two young men from Egulac went down to the river to hunt seals, and while they were there it became foggy and calm. Then they heard war-cries, and they thought: "Maybe this is a war-party". They escaped to the shore, and hid behind a log. Now canoes came up, and they heard the noise of paddles, and saw one canoe coming up to them. There were five men in the canoe, and they said: "What do you think ? We wish to take you along. We are going up the river to make war on the people". One of the young men said: "I have no arrows". "Arrows are in the canoe", they said. "I will not go along. I might be killed. My relatives do not know where I have gone. But you", he said, turning to the other, "may go with them." So one of the young men went, but the other returned home. And the warriors went on up the river to a town on the other side of Kalama. The people came down to the water, and they began to fight, and many were killed. But presently the young man heard one of the warriors say: "Quick, let us go home: that Indian has been hit". Now he thought: "Oh, they are ghosts". He did not feel sick, but they said he had been shot. So the canoes went back to Egulac, and the young man went ashore to his house, and made a fire. And he told everybody and said: " Behold I accompanied the ghosts, and we went to fight. Many of our fellows were killed, and many of those who attacked us were killed. They said I was hit, and I did not feel sick". He told it all, and then he became quiet. When the sun rose he fell down. Something black came out of his mouth. His face became contorted. The people jumped up and cried. He was dead.(p.65)"(p.65)
AIMS: The purpose behind using a story from a different cultural background was to induce distortions in memory recall, predicated on the hypothesis that participants would inevitably interpret and reconstruct the story through the lens of their own cultural understanding and expectations. This reconstructive process, Bartlett posited, would be heavily influenced by the participants' schemas, which organise and interpret information based on accumulated experiences and knowledge.
RECONSTRUCTION AND RATIONALISATION
As participants were asked to recall the story after reading it, Bartlett observed that the recollections were not accurate reproductions of the original tale. Instead, the retellings were modified in ways that made them more congruent with the participants' cultural expectations and knowledge bases. They omitted details, changed unfamiliar cultural elements to make them more consistent with their own culture, and made the story more conventional and coherent based on their own experiences and expectations, e.g., they shortened it and changed phrases and words to be more familiar, like using "boat" instead of "canoe." He also noted other errors, such as forgetting unfamiliar details (flattening) and embellishing certain details (sharpening). For example, one participant's recall included two ghosts on a river in a canoe with five men, starting a war where some were wounded and killed. Another participant's version depicted two friends encountering ghostly figures near a mysterious pool, observing their activities, and eventually returning to their village. Over time, the story transformed to reflect the participants cultural beliefs and norms.
KEY CONCEPTS FROM BARLETT
Reconstruction refers to the way individuals fill in gaps in their memories with information that, while not directly remembered, seems plausible based on their existing knowledge and cultural schemas. Bartlett's work highlighted that memory is not merely about retrieving stored information but involves actively piecing together details in a way that makes sense to the individual, influenced heavily by cultural context and personal schemas. This study not only challenged previous notions of memory as a static and accurate reproduction of past events but also paved the way for further research into the subjective nature of memory recall.
BRANSFORD AND JOHNSON
Following the foundational work of Frederic Bartlett on reconstructive memory, many researchers have contributed to expanding the understanding of how memories are formed, stored, and recalled. Among these, John Bransford and Marcia Johnson have made significant contributions, particularly in the area of comprehension and memory processes.
Bransford and Johnson's work fits into the research on memory and understanding by exploring how context and clarity of information affect memory recall and comprehension. One of their most notable studies involved demonstrating how providing a meaningful context before presenting information greatly enhances both understanding and the ability to remember that information later. In their 1972 experiment, participants were given a passage to read that was difficult to comprehend on its own. However, when a relevant title or clear context was provided beforehand, comprehension and recall rates improved significantly.
BRANSFORD AND JOHNSON’S RESEARCH
Bransford and Johnson's research built upon Bartlett's ideas by further exploring the mechanisms behind how memories are reconstructed, particularly emphasising the role of context and prior knowledge. Where Bartlett focused on how cultural background and personal experiences shape memory reconstruction, Bransford and Johnson delved into how immediate context and the clarity of information at the time of encoding also play crucial roles.
The selection principle, as discussed by Bransford and Johnson in their research on memory and comprehension, refers to the process by which individuals selectively focus on certain aspects of information based on relevance and prior knowledge when trying to understand and remember it. This principle suggests that during the encoding and recall of information, people are more likely to attend to and retain details that they perceive as significant or meaningful within a given context
One notable experiment by Bransford and Johnson that illustrates the selection principle involved participants being presented with a complex, ambiguous passage for reading. The passage described the process of washing clothes but did so in a convoluted manner that made it difficult for readers to understand without prior context.
BRANSFORD AND JOHNSON PASSAGE
“The procedure is actually quite simple. First you arrange things into different groups. Of course, one pile may be sufficient depending on how much there is to do. If you have to go somewhere else due to lack of facilities that is the next step, otherwise you are pretty well set. It is important not to overdo things. That is, it is better to do too few things at once than too many. In the short run this may not seem important but complications can easily arise. A mistake can be expensive as well. At first the whole procedure will seem complicated.
Soon, however, it will become just another facet of life. It is difficult to foresee any end to the
necessity for this task in the immediate future, but then one never can tell, After the procedure is completed one arranges the materials into different groups again. Then they can be put into their appropriate places. Eventually they will be used once more and the whole cycle will then have to be repeated. However, that is part of life.” (p. 722)Q: WHAT IS THE NARRATOR OF THE EXTRACT DOING?
In the study, participants were divided into groups. One group was given a title or a brief introduction that provided context to the passage ("Doing Laundry") before they read it, while another group received the passage with no context. A third group was given the context only after reading the passage.
The results showed that participants who were given the context before reading the passage had significantly better comprehension and recall of the information compared to those who received no context or were only given the context after reading. This experiment demonstrated the selection principle by showing how having relevant context beforehand allowed participants to select and focus on important information in the passage, effectively integrating it with their prior knowledge.
This ability to focus on and remember details based on their perceived relevance within a given context underscores the active role of the learner in the process of memory encoding and retrieval. It highlights how context and prior knowledge guide the selection of information to attend to, thereby facilitating more effective learning and memory recall..
in a similar study, Bransford and Johnson presented participants with the following passage:
“If the balloons popped, the sound wouldn't be able to carry since everything would be too far away from the correct floor. A closed window would also prevent the sound from carrying since most buildings tend to be well insulated. Since the whole operation depends on a steady flow of electricity, a break in the middle of the wire would also cause problems. Of course, the fellow
could shout, but the human voice is not loud enough to carry that far. An additional problem is that a string could break on the instrument. Then, there could be no accompaniment to the message. It is clear that the best situation would involve less distance. Then there would be fewer potential problems. With face-to-face contact, the least number of things could go wrong. “(p. 719)
Participants were divided into groups. One group was given the picture below , while another group received the passage with no picture . A third group was given the picture only after reading the passage.
Bransford and Johnson's research demonstrated the selection principle by showing that when participants were provided with the context (in this case, knowing that the passage describes a scenario involving a children's party or something similar), they were better able to select relevant information, organize it coherently, and recall it later. This study underscored the importance of context in processing and remembering information, illustrating how prior knowledge and expectations guide our attention and memory reconstruction.
The participants who viewed the picture before reading the paragraph found the text more comprehensible, and their memory retention was notably better. However, when the same picture was presented after reading the paragraph or when only a partial view of the image was provided before reading, participants struggled to make sense of the paragraph, leading to reduced memory recall.
In this experimental context, the picture serves as a schema, providing a structure to the information in the paragraph and guiding the selection of what is remembered. Without this guiding structure, participants lacked a framework to identify what information to remember, resulting in limited memory retention. Notably, the effectiveness of the picture as a schema was most pronounced when presented before participants read the paragraph, highlighting the crucial role of schemas during the encoding phase—the process of storing new information.
EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
In 1985, a young woman named Jennifer Thompson identified Ronald Cotton, a restaurant worker, in a North Carolina courtroom as the man who had invaded her home and assaulted her at knifepoint the previous year. Thompson’s assured identification was a decisive factor in the jury’s decision to convict Cotton, who received a life sentence plus 50 years. However, while incarcerated, Cotton encountered a man named Bobby Poole, who bore such a striking resemblance to him that they were frequently confused for each other. Poole let slip to another inmate that he was the actual perpetrator of the crime against Thompson. After a decade in prison, Cotton had his conviction overturned when DNA testing confirmed Poole as the assailant.
The man on the left, Ron Cotton, who spent 11 years in prison for the rape of Jennifer Thompson. The man on the right is the rapist. During the assault, Thompson made careful effort to remember her rapist's facial features. Nonetheless she generated a composite and then picked out from a police lineup innocent man. Her memory of the perpetrator's face was changed by these activities without her awareness. She was confident that she was identifying the person who raped her
ELIAZABETH LOFTUS
Elizabeth Loftus is a prominent American cognitive psychologist and expert on human memory, best known for her extensive research on the malleability of human memory and the phenomenon of false memories. Her work has had a profound impact on the fields of psychology, law, and forensic science, particularly in understanding how memories can be influenced by suggestion, misinformation, and misremembering.
Loftus' research has demonstrated that eyewitness testimonies, which are often considered highly reliable in courtrooms, can be surprisingly inaccurate. Through various experiments, she has shown that people's memories of events can be altered by introducing misleading information post-event, a process known as the misinformation effect. This effect has significant implications for the legal system, highlighting the potential for false memories to be created by suggestive questioning, leading to wrongful convictions.
One of her most famous studies involved participants watching footage of a car accident and then answering questions about what they saw. By changing just one word in the questions (e.g., "hit" to "smashed"), Loftus found that participants' recollections of the accident, including the speed of the cars and whether there was broken glass on the scene, could be significantly altered.
Beyond her work on memory suggestibility, Loftus has also explored the phenomenon of false memories, where individuals remember events that never actually happened. Her research in this area has shown that it's possible to implant entirely fabricated memories in some individuals' minds, such as being lost in a shopping mall as a child.
Loftus has faced both acclaim and controversy for her work, especially from those who argue that her findings could be used to discredit genuine victims' testimonies. Despite this, her contributions to psychology have been widely recognized, making her one of the most cited psychologists of the 20th century. Her work continues to influence how legal systems around the world consider and evaluate eyewitness testimonies and memory evidence
FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY:
MISLEADING INFORMATION, INCLUDING LEADING QUESTIONS AND POST-EVENT DISCUSSION; ANXIETY.
Misleading information and leading questions are related concepts often discussed in the context of memory and eyewitness testimony, but they target different aspects of how external inputs can influence recall.
MISLEADING INFORMATION
Misleading information encompasses a broad spectrum of incorrect or deceptive inputs that can significantly influence an individual's recall of events. This term covers phenomena such as schemas, leading questions, the emotional state at the time of memory formation, and post-event discussions, among others. Misleading information can be introduced through various channels, including conversations, media exposure, or documentation that presents inaccuracies about an event. The consequences of misleading information are profound, as it can foster false memories, modify existing recollections, or skew the accuracy of memory recall. Such distortions hold considerable implications in several domains, notably in legal settings where eyewitness testimony can sway judicial decisions, as well as in personal and societal contexts where they can shape beliefs and behaviours
LEADING QUESTIONS
Leading questions are queries that suggest a particular answer or contain information that the questioner is aiming to have confirmed. These types of questions are phrased in such a way that they guide the respondent towards a specific response, often by including assumptions or specific details within the question itself. For example, imagine a scenario where a teacher is trying to determine if a student cheated on a test. Instead of asking an open-ended question, the teacher asks, "You copied the answers from your classmate during the test, didn't you?" This question presupposes guilt and leads the student towards admitting to cheating, regardless of whether or not it actually happened. The way the question is phrased contains an assumption about the student's actions, potentially influencing the student's response and altering their recollection of the event.
RESEARCH MISLEADING QUESTIONS
ELIZABETH LOFTUS AND JOHN PALMER (1974)
Thes researchers conducted various experiments measuring how leading information affected recall. 45 students were shown several films of road traffic incidents and then given a questionnaire to describe the accident and answer a series of questions about their observations. One critical question varied between conditions, with one group asking how fast the vehicles were going when they “hit” each other, while other groups had verbs implying different degrees of a collision, such as “bumped, smashed, contacted, collided”. Results found the words that implied a stronger collision resulted in greater average estimates of speeds from participants. Those exposed to “smashed” gave the highest estimates (41mph) while “contacted” resulted in the lowest speed estimate (30mph), demonstrating how leading questions could influence memory recall.
The experiment was recreated with another group with the verbs “smashed” and “hit” while a control group was not exposed to such leading questions. They were questioned one week later and asked a series of questions with one critical question being whether they witnessed any broken glass. There was no broken glass in the film; however, results found that those who were exposed to the “smashed” condition and thus led to believe the car was travelling faster were more likely to report seeing broken glass, with the control group being the least likely. This highlighted how misleading information post-event can change how information is stored or recalled.
LOFTUS AND ZANNI BROKEN HEADLIGHT EXPERIMENT (1975)
Loftus and Zanni examined the effect of definite articles in questions on memory recall. After viewing a film of a car accident, participants were asked either "Did you see a broken headlight?" or "Did you see the broken headlight?" The use of "the" implied the existence of a broken headlight, leading more participants to incorrectly report seeing one, highlighting how subtle language cues can create false memories.
LOFTUS (1975) - STOP SIGN EXPERIMENT
Loftus conducted an experiment where participants viewed slides of a car approaching a stop sign, later suggested to some as a yield sign through questioning. The misleading information led participants to misremember the sign they saw, showcasing how memory can be distorted by suggestive questioning.
CESI, ET AL, (1994b) The study led by Stephen Ceci involved querying children about both everyday events and events that never actually occurred. For example, children were asked to recall a fictional event, such as getting a finger caught in a mousetrap and needing to go to the hospital to have the trap removed. They were instructed to think deeply and attempt to visualise the event periodically over ten-week intervals.
In this research, children were repeatedly asked about events that never occurred, and with each interview, more children began to agree that these false events had happened. Interestingly, even after 11 interview sessions, when the children were informed that some of the events they had described were actually imagined and did not occur, many of them persisted in their false statements.
After ten weeks, it was found that approximately half of the children had developed memories of one of the fabricated events, complete with elaboration and detailed descriptions. For instance, some children provided vivid accounts of how their brother attempted to take a blowtorch from them, resulting in a struggle that led to their finger being caught in a mouse trap. They further elaborated on the experience, describing the trip to the hospital with their parents and brother in the family van, and the subsequent medical treatment received for their injured finger.
This study highlights the susceptibility of children to suggestion and the potential for the creation of false memories through repeated questioning and visualization exercises. It underscores the importance of critically evaluating the reliability of children's memories, especially when they are influenced by suggestive techniques or misinformation.The study conducted by Ceci and his colleagues, explored the phenomenon of children's increasing assent to false events over multiple interviews
NICHOLAS SPANOS, ET AL, (1995) Nicholas Spanos and his colleagues investigated the creation of false memories by leading participants to believe they possessed certain skills based on false information about their infancy. In this study, participants were falsely informed that the hospital in which they were born had placed colored mobiles over their cribs, which supposedly enhanced their eye movements and visual exploration skills. Half of the participants were hypnotized, while the other half were encouraged to construct mental images of their experiences. The results showed that participants in both groups were highly susceptible to suggestion, with 46% of hypnotized participants and 56% of those encouraged to construct mental images developing false memories of having well-coordinated eye movements and visual exploration skills due to the colored mobiles. Furthermore, some participants later "recalled" additional events from their time at the hospital, demonstrating the potential for memory contamination and the creation of false memories through suggestion. This study underscores the ease with which false memories can be implanted, particularly when individuals are provided with suggestive information about their past experiences. It highlights the importance of critically evaluating the reliability of memories, especially those influenced by external suggestions or misinformation
LOFTUS AND PICKRELL (1995) conducted this study to examine the phenomenon of false memories, specifically how suggestions can create memories of events that never actually occurred. Twenty-four participants aged 18-53 were given narratives of four childhood events. Three of these narratives described real events that had happened to the subjects as children, as confirmed by a relative. The fourth narrative described a false event—the participant supposedly being lost in a shopping mall at the age of five. This event was plausible but did not actually happen, which was also confirmed by a relative.Participants were then asked questions on whether they recalled these stories.
Despite the false event never occurring, when the subjects were asked to recall these childhood events, a significant portion of them—29%—reported some memory of the false event. They remembered details such as being lost, crying, being aided by an elderly woman, and eventually being reunited with their family.
This result of 29% of subjects recalling a false memory, compared to the 68% recall of true memories, demonstrates the susceptibility of human memory to suggestion and the creation of false memories. This has profound implications for areas such as eyewitness testimony, where the reliability of memory can be crucial to the outcome of legal proceedings. The study by Loftus and Pickrell is often cited to argue that memory can be influenced by external factors and that confidence in one's memories may not always correspond with their accuracy.
HYMAN, ET AL. (1995) Hyman and his colleagues conducted their study on the creation of false memories in 1995” In this study, participants were presented with a list of events from their childhood, including both real events confirmed by family members and one false event—specifically, being hospitalized overnight for a high fever and possible ear infection.
Participants were interviewed twice, with some time between interviews. During the initial interview, no participants recalled the false event. However, during the second interview, after exposure to suggestive questioning or other information, some participants began to recall elements of the false event. Approximately 20% of participants reported remembering something related to the false event during the second interview.
For example, one participant recalled details such as a male doctor, a female nurse, and a friend from church visiting them at the hospital—details that were entirely fabricated as part of the false event. This study demonstrated how suggestion and misinformation can lead to the creation of false memories, even for events that never actually occurred.
SAUL M KASSIN, (1997) Students were falsely accused by a confederate of damaging a computer by pressing the wrong key, took place in 1997. Many of the students implicated in the false accusation ended up signing confessions, indicating their internalized guilt over the alleged wrongdoing. Additionally, some of these students confabulated additional details related to the false event, further illustrating the impact of suggestive questioning and social pressure on memory recall and fabrication. This study underscores the potential for coerced confessions and the creation of false memories in individuals subjected to suggestive interrogation techniques.
EVALUATION FOR LEADING QUESTIONS
SUGGESTIBILITY AND LEADING QUESTIONS
In situations where the memory of an event is vague, incomplete, or not confidently encoded, suggestibility and the influence of leading questions become significant concerns. Witnesses who were not sure about specific details to begin with are more susceptible to having their memories altered by suggestive questioning. This can lead to the incorporation of false information into their recollections, not because they have "forgotten" the crime, but because their initial encoding of the event was not comprehensive or because their memory has been distorted over time.
In summary, while paying attention during a crime might help encode the event into memory, various factors can influence the accuracy and completeness of that memory. This underscores the importance of careful and sensitive interviewing techniques, such as the cognitive interview, which are designed to minimise suggestibility and aid in the accurate retrieval of memories
MISLEADING INFORMATION: POST EVENT DISCUSSION
Post-event discussion refers to the conversations that occur after an event has taken place, which can influence and potentially alter individuals' memories of that event. This phenomenon is significant because during such discussions, people can be exposed to new information, perspectives, or interpretations that they did not personally experience. As a result, this additional information can become integrated into their own memory of the event, leading to changes in how they recall specific details.
For example, if two witnesses discuss their observations after witnessing a crime, one witness might mention seeing a blue car fleeing the scene, a detail the other witness did not originally notice. This new piece of information might be incorporated into the second witness's memory, leading them to believe they also saw the blue car, even if they did not. This process illustrates how post-event discussions can contribute to the creation of false memories or alter existing ones, emphasizing the reconstructive nature of memory and its susceptibility to external influences
The way an event is remembered can also be altered or contaminated by discussing events with others and/or being questioned repeatedly.
RESEARCH
SHAW AND GARVAN (1993): In this study, participants witnessed a staged event and then engaged in either a collaborative recall session with other witnesses or an individual recall session. The researchers found that participants who engaged in collaborative recall were more likely to report incorrect details that were suggested by co-witnesses. This study highlighted the impact of social influence during post-event discussion on memory accuracy
GARRY ET AL, (1996): This study examined the impact of post-event discussion on the creation of false memories. Participants viewed a series of slides depicting a fictitious event and then engaged in group discussions about the event. The researchers found that participants were more likely to report false details about the event that were suggested during the group discussion, even if they had not originally seen those details in the slides. This study demonstrated how post-event discussion can lead to the formation of false memories through the incorporation of misinformation from others.
GABBERT ET AL. (2003)
This study by Fiona Gabbert and her colleagues focused on memory conformity following post-event discussion. Participants watched a video of a crime from different angles and then discussed it. The findings revealed that 71% of participants recalled details they could not have seen, adopting information from the discussion, indicating how leading discussions can alter individual memories.
WRIGHT ET AL. (2000): This study investigated the impact of post-event discussion on eyewitness memory accuracy in a real-world context. Participants witnessed a staged event and then engaged in a discussion about what they had seen with other witnesses. The results showed that participants who engaged in post-event discussion were more likely to incorporate misinformation into their own recollections compared to those who did not engage in discussion.
CLARK AND WELLS (2008): This study examined the effects of post-event discussion on eyewitness memory in children. The researchers found that children who engaged in discussion with co-witnesses were more likely to incorporate misinformation into their memories compared to those who did not engage in discussion. Additionally, the presence of a dominant co-witness in the discussion further increased the likelihood of memory contamination
EVALUATION FOR POST EVENT INFORMATION
IS MEMORY FOR POST EVENT DISCUSSION RELIABLE - CONFLICTING EVIDENCE.
Memon et al. (2006): This study found that post-event discussions may not always lead to memory contamination. In their research, participants watched a video of a crime and then engaged in a discussion with co-witnesses who provided either accurate or inaccurate information about the event. Contrary to expectations, participants exposed to inaccurate information during the discussion did not show a significant increase in memory distortion compared to those who received accurate information. This suggests that the impact of post-event discussions on memory recall may depend on various factors, such as the nature of the misinformation and individual differences in susceptibility to suggestion.
Paterson et al. (2019): In this study, researchers investigated the role of social conformity in post-event discussions. Participants witnessed a simulated crime and then engaged in discussions with co-witnesses who provided conflicting information about the event. The researchers found that while participants were influenced by the misinformation provided by co-witnesses, they were also able to resist conformity and maintain accurate memories in some cases. This suggests that individuals may not always succumb to social pressure during post-event discussions and may retain accurate memories despite exposure to misinformation.
Wright et al. (2019): This study explored the impact of post-event discussions on children's memory recall. Contrary to expectations, the researchers found that post-event discussions did not always lead to memory distortion in children. In some cases, children were able to accurately recall details of an event even after engaging in discussions with co-witnesses who provided misleading information. This suggests that children may be less susceptible to memory contamination from post-event discussions than previously thought.
ANXIETY AND EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
Being anxious can significantly affect eyewitness testimony (EWT) through both physical and psychological mechanisms:
Physical Effects
Increased Heart Rate and Blood Pressure: Anxiety triggers the body's fight-or-flight response, leading to elevated heart rate and blood pressure. This can sharpen focus in the short term but may impair the ability to recall details accurately later.
Adrenaline Rush: The adrenaline rush associated with anxiety can enhance memory of the central aspects of an event (due to heightened attention) but detrimentally affect recall of peripheral details.
Sensory Overload: High anxiety can lead to sensory overload, where the brain is bombarded with information. This can make it difficult to focus on specific details, leading to gaps in memory.
Psychological Effects
Narrowed Attention: Anxiety can cause a narrowing of attention, focusing on the source of threat or anxiety. While this might improve memory of certain central details, it often comes at the expense of peripheral details.
Memory Distortion: Anxiety can lead to the distortion of memories. The stress and fear associated with anxiety can alter how memories are encoded, stored, and retrieved, making them less accurate.
Confirmation Bias: Anxious individuals may be more susceptible to confirmation bias, where they are more likely to remember and report details that confirm their anxious feelings or beliefs about the event, potentially ignoring or misremembering conflicting information.
Rumination: Anxious individuals may ruminate over the event, which can alter their memory of it. Repeatedly thinking about the event can lead to changes in how it is remembered, often embellishing or diminishing certain aspects of the memory.
RESEARCH ON ANXIETY
THE YERKES DODSON LAW
The Yerkes-Dodson law, formulated by psychologists Robert M. Yerkes and John Dillingham Dodson in 1908, describes the relationship between arousal (or stress) and performance. According to this law, performance increases with physiological or mental arousal up to a certain point, after which further arousal begins to decrease performance. In simpler terms, moderate levels of arousal can enhance performance, but excessive or insufficient arousal can lead to a decline in performance.
The Yerkes-Dodson curve illustrates this relationship graphically. It typically takes the form of an inverted U-shaped curve, with arousal levels plotted on the x-axis and performance levels plotted on the y-axis. As arousal increases from low to moderate levels, performance also increases. However, beyond the optimal level of arousal, performance begins to decline, eventually reaching a point where it drops below baseline levels.
Here is a description of the key features of the Yerkes-Dodson curve:
Low Arousal: At very low levels of arousal, performance tends to be suboptimal. This is because there is insufficient activation of cognitive or physiological processes necessary for effective task performance.
Moderate Arousal (Optimal Arousal): As arousal increases from low to moderate levels, performance improves. This is the peak of the curve, where individuals are in an optimal state of alertness and arousal, leading to enhanced cognitive functioning and task performance.
High Arousal: Beyond the optimal level of arousal, further increases in arousal lead to a decline in performance. This can be attributed to factors such as increased stress, distraction, or the narrowing of attentional focus, which impede cognitive processes and impair task performance.
Individual Differences: It's important to note that the optimal level of arousal varies between individuals and tasks. Some people may perform best under conditions of high arousal, while others may excel under lower levels of arousal. Additionally, the nature of the task itself can influence the optimal arousal level required for peak performance.
Deffenbacher reviewed 21 studies finding the stress-performance relationship followed an inverted U as proposed by the Yerkes-Dodson Curve. This means that the efficiency of eyewitness testimony depended on the level of stress/anxiety with low and high amounts of anxiety resulting in poorer recall while moderate levels of anxiety yielded the best and most optimum level of recall and performance. The practical application here is that establishing eyewitnesses level of arousal/anxiety may be key in court evidence to determine the validity of their account. However, this in itself is likely to be difficult and purely based on a subjective measure in itself.
CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS
Christianson (1993) et al. found contradicting evidence. When witnesses to real bank robberies were tested on recall, they found that increased anxiety led to improvements in the accuracy of recall. This suggests high levels of anxiety in situations do not always divert attention away from what is happening.
WEAPON FOCUS AND ANXIETY
Weapon focus refers to the phenomenon where individuals focus their attention on a weapon during a criminal act, often at the expense of other details. This concept has been studied extensively in the field of psychology and criminology. When a weapon is present, witnesses or victims may be more likely to remember details about the weapon itself rather than other aspects of the situation or the perpetrator.
Weapon focus and anxiety can interact in several ways:
Enhanced Attention to the Weapon: When individuals experience anxiety in a threatening situation, their attention may become heightened and more narrowly focused on the perceived threat, which in this case could be the weapon. This heightened state of arousal can amplify the weapon focus effect, making individuals more likely to fixate on the weapon and less likely to notice other details in their surroundings.
Impaired Cognitive Processing: Anxiety can impair cognitive processing and memory encoding. When individuals are anxious, their cognitive resources may be diverted toward managing their emotional state, leaving fewer resources available for encoding peripheral details of the event. This can exacerbate the weapon focus effect by reducing the individual's ability to remember aspects of the situation beyond the weapon itself.
Increased Perceived Threat: Anxiety can increase the perceived threat level of a situation. In the presence of a weapon, individuals experiencing anxiety may perceive the situation as more dangerous and therefore focus their attention more intensely on the weapon as a means of assessing the threat and formulating a response. This heightened sense of threat can further exacerbate the weapon focus effect.
Memory Retrieval Interference: Anxiety can interfere with memory retrieval processes. Even if individuals initially encode details of the event, anxiety at the time of recall can disrupt their ability to retrieve those memories accurately. This can lead to difficulties in recalling details beyond the weapon, contributing to the weapon focus effect during testimony or when providing descriptions to law enforcement.
Loftus et al found similar findings when two groups in different conditions observed a violent and non-violent event. In condition 1, a man exited a discussion holding a pen, while in condition 2, I saw a man exiting holding a paper knife covered in blood after a loud altercation. The group who observed the pen were more accurate (49%) than the group observing the violent situation (33%). A possible explanation is the weapon may have distracted their attention from everything else happening and may explain why some witnesses struggle for other details in violent crimes as their focus switches to the weapon itself.
Clifford and Scott found that people who saw a film of a violent attack remembered less than people in a control group who saw a less stressful version. They concluded that witnessing stressful situations in real life will be far more stressful than observing a film and memory accuracy may well be more affected in real life with poorer recall. However, Christianson (1993) et al. found contradicting evidence. When witnesses to real bank robberies were tested on recall, they found increased anxiety led to improvements in the accuracy of recall. This suggests high levels of anxiety in situations do not always divert attention away from what is happening.
Weapon Focus and Cognitive Load (1995, Steblay et al.): This study examined the role of cognitive load on weapon focus. Participants watched a video of a simulated theft, with some asked to memorize a digit while watching. Results indicated that those under cognitive load showed a greater weapon focus effect, suggesting that cognitive resources play a role in determining the extent of weapon focus.
Weapon Focus and Anxiety (2001, Christianson & Hubinette): This study investigated the relationship between anxiety and weapon focus. Results suggested that eyewitnesses with higher levels of anxiety exhibited a stronger weapon focus effect, indicating that anxiety exacerbates the tendency to focus on the weapon rather than other details of the crime scene.
Real-World Applications: Research has also examined the practical implications of weapon focus in forensic investigations. Understanding the dynamics of weapon focus has led to recommendations for law enforcement to minimize distractions during witness interviews, use open-ended questioning techniques, and consider the role of anxiety in eyewitness testimony
EVALUATION OF RESEARCH ON ANXIETY
Due to the ease of replication, other studies have found similar findings showing the findings of Deffenbacher and Loftus are reliable. However, the replicated studies tend to be within artificial settings, which could affect results and lack external validity and wider generalisation to real-world situations, which is again limited.
Yuille & Cutshall’s study contradicts laboratory findings, highlighting the importance of stress in eyewitness testimony. Witnesses to a real-life violent crime such as a gun shooting were found to have remarkable memories of the stressful situation even after observing the gunman be killed. Even those re-interviewed five months later were found to have accurate recall with even misleading questions which were inserted into the questioning having no effect. One thing to note, however, was the witnesses who experienced the most stress were closest to the event, and this may have aided their accurate recall. Therefore, proximity to events itself may be a confounding variable in such research studies. This study illustrated that in instances of real-life stressful situations recall may be accurate even months later. Also, misleading questions, as illustrated, tended to have less of an effect in real-life situations compared to Loftus & Palmer’s laboratory study on misleading questions and stress may be a stronger mitigating factor in recall.
Studies that have subsequently found stress/anxiety to aid recall were likely to have experienced the first increasing levels of stress in the Yerkes-Dodson curve while those suffering from poor recall may be due to them being within the second part with over-arousal resulting in poor recall performance. Such studies involving violence (Loftus/ Clifford) to heighten anxiety levels also raise ethical concerns due to the possible psychological harm they can cause from observing such events. Other research suggests age is also a mitigating factor which could be a confounding variable beyond simply anxiety and this needs to be considered also.
There is also research evidence to suggest the Yerkes-Dodson curve is far too simplified to explain how anxiety affects eyewitness accounts. Fazey & Hardy (1988) proposed Catastrophe theory which may better explain the conflicting findings of how anxiety affects EWT on a 3- dimensional scale. This includes performance, physiological arousal and also cognitive anxiety too. This model proposes that as physiological arousal increases beyond the moderate optimum level, unlike the Yerkes-Dodson curve where there is a steady decline, they observed a drastic drop in performance which they proposed is caused by increased mental anxiety and worry. However, trying to distinguish whether a person felt anxiety or stress in itself would be difficult and subjective.
OVERALL EVALUATION
The weakness here is that such studies are laboratory studies and, therefore, mundane realism and ecological validity.
In real-life scenarios, eyewitnesses to crimes often experience intense emotions such as fear, anxiety, or shock. These emotions can significantly impact the encoding and retrieval of memories related to the event. For example, during a robbery, a witness may be in a state of fear, focusing primarily on the threat rather than details of the perpetrator's appearance. Similarly, a witness to a car accident may feel anxious or distressed, affecting their ability to accurately recall specific details of the event.
Moreover, the motivation and significance attached to the event play a crucial role in eyewitness testimony. In a real crime situation, witnesses understand the gravity of their testimony and the potential consequences it may have on the outcome of legal proceedings. The fear of misidentifying a suspect or providing inaccurate information can heighten the witness's attention and motivation to recall details accurately.
Moreover, in experimental settings where participants watch videos or engage in simulated scenarios, the level of emotional arousal and motivation may not fully mirror that of real-life situations. Participants may lack the same sense of urgency, fear, or personal stake in the outcome, leading to differences in attention, encoding, and retrieval of information.
More interestingly, real-life studies outside the laboratory setting by Yuille and Cutshall have found that witnesses to real events tended to have accurate recall even many months after witnessing events, with misleading questions having little effect, suggesting previous findings by Loftus into leading questions may be limited to laboratory settings. This may be explained due to highly motivated participants displaying demand characteristics that may not indicate real witnesses. In real situations, arousal, stress, anxiety, or concentration may be a stronger factor in recall than leading questions.
FOSTER ET AL, (1995) found supporting evidence for motivation in one study where participants who thought they were watching a real-life robbery and believed their responses would impact an upcoming trial actually be more accurate in their recall.
In 1994, a team of researchers led by Foster and including Libkuman, Schooler, and Loftus embarked on a study to explore how much the perceived importance of identifying someone in a police lineup affects how accurately witnesses can do so. They were curious whether feeling that your identification could really change the outcome of a trial—essentially making a big difference in someone's life—would make people more or less accurate in picking the correct person from a lineup.
To test this, they set up experiments where participants were led to believe either that their identification was crucial (high stakes) or not important at all (low stakes). Surprisingly, the results showed that people who thought their role was critical didn’t necessarily perform any worse than those who believed their identification was of little consequence. This finding challenges the common belief that the added pressure of high stakes might make people less reliable in identifying suspects.
Moreover, the study shed light on the intricate mental processes involved when witnesses are asked to identify someone, especially under different levels of perceived importance. This insight is particularly valuable for the legal system, highlighting the need to consider how eyewitnesses perceive their role and the conditions under which they make identifications.
POPULATION VALIDITY The use of students in the study could introduce confounding variables, potentially limiting the generalisability of the findings. Since students may not represent the full spectrum of ages and backgrounds found in the wider population, the study may lack population validity. Additionally, age has been shown to influence susceptibility to leading questions, with younger individuals generally being more vulnerable to suggestion. Therefore, focusing solely on students may not accurately capture how leading questions affect different age groups, potentially compromising the study's internal validity.
Moreover, the use of questionnaires in data collection presents its own set of challenges. Ambiguities in question wording or response options could lead to participant misunderstandings or misinterpretations, affecting the reliability of the data. Furthermore, researchers' interpretations of participants' responses may introduce bias or misinterpretation, further undermining the study's internal validity.
Critiques of these of lab studies often highlight that the studies are conducted in laboratory environments, where participants, being motivated and eager to participate, may not accurately reflect the demeanor of real-life witnesses. This heightened motivation could serve as a confounding variable, potentially skewing the results. Consequently, the risk of demand characteristics—where participants form an interpretation of the experiment's purpose and subconsciously change their behavior to fit that interpretation—is significantly increased in such controlled settings
On the plus side, experimental studies offer clear advantages in understanding the impact of leading questions and misinformation on memory recall. Unlike field studies, experiments conducted in laboratory settings enable researchers to control for extraneous variables, ensuring a clearer link between leading questions and recall. Additionally, the controlled environment facilitates result verification through replication, establishing reliable outcomes. Furthermore, experimental designs allow for the establishment of cause-and-effect relationships, shedding light on how leading questions influence memory recall—a feat challenging to achieve in real-world settings. Consistent findings across repeat studies bolster the understanding that leading questions and misinformation can indeed affect recall.
ETHICAL CONCERNS: The process of implanting false memories or exposing participants to misleading information raises ethical issues, involving temporary deception of participants, which could have unforeseen psychological impacts.
VARIABILITY IN INDIVIDUAL SUSCEPTIBILITY: There is significant variability in individuals' susceptibility to misleading information. Factors such as age, cognitive abilities, and stress levels can influence the effect of misleading information on memory recall, making it challenging to predict the reliability of eyewitness testimony based solely on the presence of misleading information.
FREUD AND MEMORY
Sigmund Freud, a prominent figure in psychoanalysis, also explored aspects of memory, although his theories differ from contemporary cognitive perspectives. Freud introduced the concept of repressed memories, suggesting that traumatic experiences could be pushed into the unconscious mind as a defence mechanism. According to Freud, these memories could later resurface, impacting an individual's mental health.
Freud's emphasis on the unconscious and the role of early childhood experiences in shaping adult behaviour contributed to his ideas about memory. He proposed that memories could be distorted, suppressed, or repressed, influencing not only individual psychology but also therapeutic approaches.
While Freudian theories have had a significant impact on the field of psychology, it's important to note that many aspects of his work, including the idea of repressed memories, have faced criticism and scepticism. The validity of repressed memories and the potential for false memories to emerge during therapeutic processes are areas of ongoing debate within the psychological community. Contemporary research, influenced by cognitive psychology and neuroscience, has provided alternative explanations for memory phenomena.
FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME: The social epidemic of the 1990s revolved around the phenomenon of recovered memories of childhood abuse, including allegations of satanic rituals. This trend was fueled by the use of suggestion in therapy sessions, where therapists employed special techniques to purportedly bring forward repressed memories. The justification behind this practice was the belief that memories of repeated abuse could be repressed and only unearthed through specialized methods.
However, objections were raised regarding the lack of empirical evidence supporting the idea that memories of such traumatic events could be repressed. Critics pointed out that repetition typically enhances memory rather than suppresses it, and the absence of dissociative disorders associated with repression further undermined the validity of these claims.
A poignant example of false memories influencing legal proceedings is the case of Eileen Franklin, who claimed to have recovered memories of witnessing her father murder her friend, Susan Nason, in 1969. Despite George Franklin's conviction for the crime, subsequent DNA tests proved his innocence. It was revealed that Eileen's memories surfaced through various means, including dreams, hypnosis during therapy sessions (which was initially denied but later admitted), and even while looking at her own daughter.
Many of the details Eileen provided matched newspaper accounts of the incident, suggesting that exposure to external information may have influenced the construction of false memories. This highlights the concept of constructive memory and the potential for memories to be distorted or fabricated, impacting personal identity and legal proceedings alike.
These findings underscore the complexity of memory and the need to critically evaluate the reliability of recollections, especially in cases involving traumatic events and suggestive therapeutic practices. The revelation that memories can be constructed, and sometimes false, raises significant implications for our understanding of personal identity and the reliability of memory as a tool for justice.
IS MEMORY RELIABLE- CONFLICTING EVIDENCE.
To understand the reliability of memory, consider two pivotal studies: Yuille and Cutshall (1986) and Bahrick et al (1975). These studies provide insights into how memory can be reliable, and they offer interesting comparisons to the research by Loftus and Palmer, Neisser and Harsch, Loftus and Pickerell, and Shaw et al.
Study I: Yuille and Cutshall (1986) Aim: To assess if leading questions influence eyewitness memory in a real crime scenario. This mirrors the objective of Loftus & Palmer (1974), but with actual crime witnesses.
Methodology: The study centred around a robbery and shooting at a Vancouver gun shop. Eyewitnesses (21 initially, 13 participated in the study) were interviewed four months post-event. They were asked to recount the incident and answer two leading questions about specific, incorrect details (a broken headlight and a yellow panel on the getaway car).
Findings: Eyewitnesses proved remarkably reliable, recalling many accurate details corroborated by police reports. They generally weren’t swayed by the leading questions, with most either correctly denying the false details or stating they didn’t notice them. Accuracy was rated between 79% and 84%.
Study II: Bahrick et al (1975) Aim: To investigate long-term autobiographical memory reliability, focusing on remembering names and faces from school.
Methodology: The study involved 392 participants, aged 17 to 74, who had graduated from high school between 2 weeks to 57 years prior. They underwent various tests, including free recall of classmates, photo recognition, name recognition, matching tests, and picture cueing.
Findings: The study found high accuracy in memory, with about 90% correctness in identifying names and faces within 15 years of graduation, reducing slightly to 80% for names and 70% for faces after 48 years. However, free recall was less accurate, dropping from 60% after 15 years to 30% after 48 years.
Comparative Analysis Compared to Loftus and Palmer, who focused on memory distortion through leading questions in artificial scenarios, Yuille and Cutshall showed that real-life, emotionally charged events could enhance memory reliability. Similarly, while Neisser and Harsch, Loftus and Pickerell, and Shaw et al highlighted the malleability and fallibility of memory, Bahrick et al demonstrated long-term memory reliability, particularly in recognition tasks, in everyday, autobiographical contexts.
Overall, these studies suggest that while memory can be influenced and distorted, especially in artificial or less emotionally charged contexts, it also has the capacity to be remarkably reliable, particularly in situations with strong emotional impacts or when it involves long-term autobiographical details
When exploring the extent to which memory is reliable, it's crucial to consider evidence supporting its reliability alongside evidence suggesting otherwise. This approach provides a balanced view, particularly in light of abundant research questioning the trustworthiness of eyewitness testimony.
OUTCOMES ON THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN LIGHT OF EWT
Witness Line-up Adjustments: Studies have shown that witnesses tend to identify suspects based on clothing rather than physical features. To address this, individuals in line-ups are now dressed identically, and their attire is different from the description provided at the crime scene. This approach minimizes the influence of clothing on identification.
Line-up Presentation and Instructions: There's a common presumption that the suspect is included in the line-up, which can skew a witness's choice. To counter this, line-ups are composed of individuals who closely resemble each other. Witnesses are also informed that the suspect might not be present in the line-up. Sequential line-ups, as suggested by Culter & Penrod, where suspects are presented one at a time and a decision is made immediately, have shown improved accuracy in identifications. Additionally, witnesses are not given feedback post-identification to avoid confirmation bias.
Cognitive Interview Technique: In collecting witness statements, a narrative style known as the Cognitive Interview is employed. This method starts with an open-ended question like, "Can you describe what you recall about the night of the incident?" This allows the witness to speak freely with minimal interruptions, reducing the risk of memory distortion through leading questions.
a.Context Reinstatement: Based on Tulving & Thomson's Encoding Specificity Hypothesis (1973), the cognitive interview begins by helping the witness recreate the context of the event. This involves considering the environment, emotional state, and other contextual factors present during the incident to enhance memory recall.
b. Perspective and Order Alteration: The interview includes techniques like changing the perspective (e.g., "What might the bank teller have seen?") and altering the sequence of events (asking to recall events forwards and backwards). These strategies disrupt the influence of pre-existing schemas and help in retrieving more detailed and accurate information.
POSSIBLE EXAM QUESTIONS FOR EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY
Explain how anxiety might affect the accuracy of eyewitness testimony (3 marks)
Describe one research study related to the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony (5 marks)
Discuss research on the effect of anxiety on eyewitness testimony (12 marks AS, 16 marks A-level).
Explain what is meant by a ‘leading question’. (3 marks)
Explain how post-event discussion might create inaccuracy in eyewitness testimony (3 marks)
Describe one research study on the effect misleading information has on eyewitness testimony (5 marks)
Outline and evaluate research into how misleading questions affect eyewitness testimony (12 marks AS and 16 marks A-level)
