Transcript Chap13

BHS 499-07
Memory and Amnesia
Memory and the Law
5 Ways Memory Affects the Law





Accuracy of eyewitness testimony
Confidence of witnesses in their
memories
Cognitive interviews that are most
effective at aiding memory
Identification of perpetrators from lineups
Effects of memory processes on juries
Wording Effects

During questioning of witnesses, wording
affects the answers.
• “How fast were cars going when they _____
•
•

each other?
Choices were smashed, collided, bumped, hit,
contacted
Next, “did you see any broken glass?” – 7%
Estimated speed – 40.8 with smashed &
16% saw glass, but 31.8 with contacted.
Misleading Postevent Info

When people are given misleading info after an
event, it affects their memory for the event
itself.
•
•
•

Consistent condition – yield sign was in video
Misleading condition – stop sign not in video
Control condition – no sign mentioned
Later given test -- 70% correct in consistent
condition, 43% in misleading, 63% in neutral
condition, with worse results after delay.
Theories



People who tell lies come to believe they
are true later – a form of this effect.
Trace replacement theory – post info
rewrites original info.
Coeexistence theory – both versions
remain in memory but the misleading
info is more recent so more accessible.
• With warning, disregarded wrong info more.
More Theories

Response bias theory – guessing biases
on the test account for the various %.
• Tested using a new/old comparison without
the misleading info as a response choice.

Source monitoring theory – people forget
the source of the misleading info,
especially during reflective tasks.
• Impact depends on the source of the info.
Arousal Influences


Emotion affects memory in complex
ways.
Yerkes-Dodson Law – bystanders more
likely to remember than victims.
• U-shaped curve because optimum arousal
level.

Easterbrook Hypothesis – peripheral
details weak, central details improved.
Arousal Influences (Cont.)

Weapon focus effect – increased
memory for the weapon, decreased
memory for everything else.
• Occurs even when the weapon is not used.
John Dean’s Memory

John Dean’s memory of Watergate
conversations was later compared to
Nixon’s audio tapes for accuracy.
• Dean was hardly ever right.
• Dean wasn’t deliberately lying.
• Important points were corroborated.

Self-centered bias.
• Thoughts were incorporated into recalled
conversations.
Eyewitness Confidence

Is a memory that a witness is unsure
about less likely to be accurate?
• Metamemory shows .41 correlation between
accuracy and confidence (excluding those
who identified no one in the lineup).


Confidence increases with post-ID
feedback on accuracy.
Telling a witness that others made the
same choice increases confidence.
Confidence (Cont.)

The more times a person is asked the
same questions, the greater the
confidence in the answers.
• Judges and juries are sway by confidence.

External motivation (reward) for
remembering increases confidence.
• When people try harder, difficulty of recall
cannot be used to assess accuracy.
Cognitive Interviews



Methods of gathering info have been
developed to improve accuracy and
prevent distortion.
First, attempt to reinstate the original
context (internal and external) by having
the person imagine or visit the scene.
Second, report partial info, whatever
comes to mind, even if insignificant.
Interview (Cont.)




Third, report components of an event in
a variety of orders, starting at different
points.
Fourth, report the info from different
perspectives.
Fifth, don’t interrupt.
Technique takes time but boosts recall
up to 50% without increasing false info.
Eyewitness ID

Two kinds of errors:

Mugshots – if people see a set of faces
and the real perpetrator is not among
them, they may ID someone else.
• Failing to ID a perpetrator
• Mistakenly identifying an innocent person
• This commitment impairs the ability to later ID
the correct person, but just looking does not.
Lineups

Relative judgment principle – people not
only compare the people to their memory
but to others in lineup.
• If others do not resemble the perp the one
who comes closest may be picked.

Lineup similarity – the physical
resemblance of others in the lineup
matters. Fillers must fit the description.
Lineups (Cont.)

Instructions should include a statement
that the correct person might not be in
the lineup.
• Otherwise pressure to select someone,
anyone.

Errors more likely with a simultaneous
lineup than a sequential one.
• Forces a comparison with memory not others.
Lineups (Cont.)



Unconscious transference – an innocent
bystander is identified as the perpetrator.
Memory bleeding explanation -- a person
remembers seeing the person but
becomes confused.
Source monitoring explanation –
remembers the person but not the
context.
Juries


Information order – juries try to construct
info into a narrative.
To assess the impact of order two
techniques are used:
• Ask people to make decisions as they go
•
along – shows recency effect.
Ask people to make decisions at the end,
after all info has been given – primacy effect
unless also given background info at start.
Inadmissible Evidence

Asking a jury to ignore inadmissible
evidence is a directed forgetting request.
• People are fairly efficient at doing this.

Juror’s memory for the inadmissible info
is poorer than for the admissible info but
it clearly has an impact on judgments.
• Source info may be lost with forgetting.
Inadmissible Evidence



The more accurate jurors believe the
inadmissible evidence to be, the more
likely it will affect judgments.
Inadmissible evidence has a weaker
impact during juror discussions because
it can be identified and set aside.
Some inadmissible evidence comes from
jurors themselves (their thoughts).
Children’s Testimony

It used to be thought that children did not or
could not tell lies.
•


Now we know children can and do lie, even very
young children.
Effective prosecution of child abuse cases
requires child testimony.
Special procedures used – shields, suspension
of hearsay rules, mandated videotaping of
interviews.
Children as Participants

Is memory different when children are
participants in an event, not bystanders?
•
•

Pairs of 4 & 7 yo kids in a trailer playing games, one
playing and one observing
Open-ended versus specific questions, some
misleading
10 days later – older kids more accurate than
younger, but no differences between observers
& participants or suggestibility of abuse.
Pediatric Visit Study




5 & 7 yo girls on a pediatric visit
•
•
Half had a scoliosis exam, half a genital exam
Tested at 1 & 4 weeks later
Older children more accurate about all
questions, but no age differences for the
misleading abuse questions.
More omission errors.
While not easily misled there were a lot of
inaccurate answers to abuse-related
questions.
Ornstein’s Studies

Significant age differences in children’s
immediate and delayed recall.
• 3 yo gave little open-ended info


As the delay increased considerable
forgetting among the younger children.
Children laughed at the silly or strange
questions asked.
Interviewing Techniques




Techniques that ask children to imagine things
that may not have occurred or think about
fictional events distort memory.
Use of peer pressure or authority affects
memory.
Selectively reinforcing certain aspects of
testimony introduces distortions.
Repeated interviews introduce distortions.
Repeated Questioning


Repeating misinformation across many
questioning sessions results in impaired
memory.
When misinformation is repeated
eventually it is accepted by the child and
becomes part of the child’s narrative.
Stereotype Induction

An attempt by the interviewer to transmit
a negative characterization of a suspect.
• Telling the child that the suspect “does bad
things” or “tries to scare children.”

Some children incorporate this info into
their answers.
Emotional Tone of Interview


Setting a warm and supportive tone
encourages children to resist intimidation
and counter false suggestions.
Some “supportive” environments may
include subtle bribes, threats or rewards.
• “We know something bad happened”
• “You’ll feel better once you tell.”
• This kind of support makes children more
likely to fabricate statements.
Confirmatory Bias


A neutral or unbiased interviewer who
inadvertently uses a biased technique is
less problematic than a biased one.
Confirmatory bias – seeking evidence in
support of a single hypothesis instead of
testing alternatives.
• Results in use of suggestive techniques that
can distort memory.
Strength of Children’s Memories



While children’s memories can be
changed by suggestive interviewing,
children often show resistance to bias.
Children are not necessarily incorrect
about everything – some facts will be
correctly remembered.
Likelihood of disclosure is unrelated to
threats made to children.