Changing the way you learn

Factors Affecting The Accuracy Of EWT

Reconstructive Memory
1. Schemas
  1. Bartlett: memory is not always a complete reproduction of an event. We reconstruct various pieces of info and use schemas to fill in the blanks
    1. Schemas are small packets of information that we build up about the world that helps us make sense of it
  2. Carmichael: Drawing of an object. P was asked to draw either 'a' or 'b'. Their visual representations were altered by language, so a schema affected our memory
    1. Not a real life situation
  3. Allport and Postman: Invesitgated stereotypes. Black man without knife but P's recalled that he did, shows that stereotypes can effect EWT
    1. Not a real life situation
  4. Tuckey and Brewer: video of a bank robbery. P's were better at remembering stereotypical bank robbery things "male robber, getaway driver" showing that stereotypes affect EWT
    1. P's were also good at remembering counter-stereotyped information
  5. Tuckey and Brewer, Cohen and Allport and Postman were all Lab Experiments which do not reflect real life. Would P's react the same way in a real-life setting
  6. Allport and Postman only used white P's. Can't generalise to other cultures. Other cultures may have different schemas
  7. Allport and Postman took place in 1947. This is old data, schemas may have changed over the years
  8. Ethical issues within the studies. Invasion of privacy, lack of informed consent
2. Leading Questions
  1. Loftus and Palmer: found that Leading Q's affect EWT as they provide 'post-event' info which is integrated with the original percepton
    1. Speed is complex thing to judge, so P's more prone to be led by LQs
  2. Loftus and Zanni: Did you see a/the broken headlight? 7% reported seeing 'a', 17% reported seeing 'the'. LQs can make Ps question whether they actually saw somethin
    1. Video, doesn't reflect real life
  3. Loftus: 98% of P's could remember the colour of the bag, and their statements were not changed, even when experienced to LQs
    1. Colour is more objective to speed estimates
  4. Alot of the studies are in artificial settings. Generalisability issues
  5. Yullie and Cutshall: interviewed 13 people who witnessed a real life robbery. Included to LQs and found P's were not led by LQs which could show that EWT is not affected by LQs in real life situations
  6. Cognitive interviews have come about a result of research into leading questions. Successful applications
The Role of Emotion
1. Does emotion improve or impede memory?
2. Freud would say repressed memories which are high in emotion would be blocked out if they are too painful or traumatic
3. Deffembauer: meta-analysis on studies of EWT and found that high stress had a negative impact on recall
4. MacLeod: 379 EWT reports of assualts compared to crime with no injury. No overall difference between accuracy of recall suggesting emotion does not make a difference to recall
  1. Issues with privacy
5. Christianson and Hubinette: found witnesses for real bank robberies who had been threatened had better recall than onlookers
  1. high ecological validity
6. Yullie and Cutshall: emotion enhances your recall of an event
7. Brown and Kulik: flashbulb memories, long lasting memories which occur during heightened emotion. Such as JFK's assassination, 9/11 etc. People are able to recall what they were doing at the time which supports the idea that emotion improves memory
  1. Odiniot: interviewed 14 witnesses of a robber. 84% of information recalled was correct, and those who reported heightened emotion had better recall
    1. Talarico and Rubin: 54 students recalled memories of 9/11 then of a less emotional events. Their recall (at periods of 1, 6 and 32 weeks) hardly differed for each event
      1. P's reported their 9/11 recall as much more vivid
8. Loftus: Weapon Effect, showed a series of slides of a customer in a resturant. In one, customer had a cheque book, in the other a gun. P's were less likely to identify the customer if he had the gun, which shows emotional scenes can throw our EWT
  1. Johnson and Scott: P's heard an argument then a man came in holding a gun/grease-covered pen. 49% in pen condition identified the man, 33% in gun identified. This supports Loftus study
    1. higher ecological validity
    2. More emotionally involved
9. Evaluation
  1. Different people experience different emotion. How can we generalise?
  2. What is emotion? Are we measuring fear, anger, anxiety
  3. Yerkes Dodson Curve shows the relationship between emotional arousal and level of performance
  4. Weapon Focus doesn't always have an effect. Yullie and Cutshall found weapon effect did not happen
  5. Weapon effect is dependent upon the length of time of the event. Hostage situations would give the P longer to identify the criminal

Next up

Factors Affecting The Accuracy Of EWT

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by HeyThereIAmKyle over 11 years ago