Describe and evaluate research into the influence of misleading information
on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. (16 marks)
Eye witness testimony is the evidence given by a witness to a significant event such as a
crime or serious accident. Leading question can affect eye witness testimony. A Leading
question is a question which is asked in such a way to suggest an expected answer they also
wrongly imply that something happened when it hasn’t, following an EWT.
Loftus and Palmer (1974) study wanted to investigate how leading question affected (recall)
estimate of speed. Experiment 1-Loftus and Palmer showed 45 uni students a video of a car
crash and the leading question (critical question) they asked the participants was, how fast
were the cars going when they ‘hit’ other each other. Loftus and Palmer found as the
increased aggression in the verb (the charge) increased so did the mean speed estimate.
Participants given the verb smashed gave the highest estimate (40.5 mph), whereas the
verb contacted gave the lowest speed estimate (31.8 mph), this study shows how leading
question could influence memory recall.
The second part of the experiment was the repetition of the first experiment and
participants were asked 1 week later whether they saw witnessed any broken glass.
Participants who originally heard the verb ‘smashed’ were more likely to report broken glass
though there wasn’t any. This experiment shows how misleading information can change
the way information is recalled and or stored.
Post event discussion can also contaminate EWT. This is when co witnesses of a crime
discuss with each other and combine misinformation from other witnesses with their
memories. Fiona Gabbert et al study into post event discussion studied participants in pairs.
The pairs watched a different video from the same event, both participants then discussed
what they had seen before recall test. The results found 71% of witnessed who had
discussed the event went onto mistakenly recall items acquired through discussion, whereas
control group was 0%. They call this phenomenon memory conformity.
A strength of Loftus and Palmer research is that it is considered scientific. This is as the study
was done in a high control lab setting, which allowed for the researcher to have high control
over extraneous variables. Advantage of the high control was that it allowed for the
researcher to establish cause and effect and to make sure that the IV (leading question) was
the only thing affecting the DV (recall). Moreover, another advantage due to the lab setting
was the researcher could replicate the study. Repeat studies show reliability through
acquiring matching results and the researcher could conclude that misleading information
and leading question affect recall. However, despite the high level of control lab studies lack
ecological validity as they are done in artificial setting. Therefore, results gained from Loftus
and Palmers study would lack external validity as you would be unable to generalise findings
to other people and situations.
Another strength of Loftus and Palmers research is real life application. For example, Loftus
(1975) believes that leading question can have such a distorting effect on memory that
police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their question when
on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. (16 marks)
Eye witness testimony is the evidence given by a witness to a significant event such as a
crime or serious accident. Leading question can affect eye witness testimony. A Leading
question is a question which is asked in such a way to suggest an expected answer they also
wrongly imply that something happened when it hasn’t, following an EWT.
Loftus and Palmer (1974) study wanted to investigate how leading question affected (recall)
estimate of speed. Experiment 1-Loftus and Palmer showed 45 uni students a video of a car
crash and the leading question (critical question) they asked the participants was, how fast
were the cars going when they ‘hit’ other each other. Loftus and Palmer found as the
increased aggression in the verb (the charge) increased so did the mean speed estimate.
Participants given the verb smashed gave the highest estimate (40.5 mph), whereas the
verb contacted gave the lowest speed estimate (31.8 mph), this study shows how leading
question could influence memory recall.
The second part of the experiment was the repetition of the first experiment and
participants were asked 1 week later whether they saw witnessed any broken glass.
Participants who originally heard the verb ‘smashed’ were more likely to report broken glass
though there wasn’t any. This experiment shows how misleading information can change
the way information is recalled and or stored.
Post event discussion can also contaminate EWT. This is when co witnesses of a crime
discuss with each other and combine misinformation from other witnesses with their
memories. Fiona Gabbert et al study into post event discussion studied participants in pairs.
The pairs watched a different video from the same event, both participants then discussed
what they had seen before recall test. The results found 71% of witnessed who had
discussed the event went onto mistakenly recall items acquired through discussion, whereas
control group was 0%. They call this phenomenon memory conformity.
A strength of Loftus and Palmer research is that it is considered scientific. This is as the study
was done in a high control lab setting, which allowed for the researcher to have high control
over extraneous variables. Advantage of the high control was that it allowed for the
researcher to establish cause and effect and to make sure that the IV (leading question) was
the only thing affecting the DV (recall). Moreover, another advantage due to the lab setting
was the researcher could replicate the study. Repeat studies show reliability through
acquiring matching results and the researcher could conclude that misleading information
and leading question affect recall. However, despite the high level of control lab studies lack
ecological validity as they are done in artificial setting. Therefore, results gained from Loftus
and Palmers study would lack external validity as you would be unable to generalise findings
to other people and situations.
Another strength of Loftus and Palmers research is real life application. For example, Loftus
(1975) believes that leading question can have such a distorting effect on memory that
police officers need to be very careful about how they phrase their question when
