Factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness testimony: misleading information.
Leading questions
- Questions that point to a certain answer because of how they are phrased.
Loftus and Palmer (car crash) 1974
- Investigated how leading questions influence an eyewitness’s memory for that event.
- 45 American university students in a lab experiment
- shown clips of car accidents and then asked questions about it.
- Participants were split into 5 groups of 9 and given a questionnaire with one leading
question.
- “How fast were the cars going when they ‘….’ Each other”
- Each group was given a different leading verb: smashed, contacted, bumped, collided,
hit.
Findings
- ‘contacted’ resulted in a mean estimated speed of 31.8mph
- ‘smashed’ resulted in a mean estimated speed of 40.5mph
Loftus and Palmer conducted a 2nd study (week later)
- Supported the substitution explanation which proposes that the wording of a leading
question changes the participants memory of the film clip.
- Participants were asked if there “was any broken glass?” in a series of questions.
- Participants in smashed condition said yes.
- Concluded the leading question changed/ reconstructed the expected memory.
Participants who heard the word smashed were more likely to say they had seen broken
glass when there wasn’t any.
How leading questions affect EWT
response-bias explanation wording of a question has no long-term effect on participant
memories but influences how they decide to answer. E.g., when they hear the word ‘smashed’ it
encourages them to choose a higher speed estimate.
substitution explanation the wording of a question does affect eyewitness memory; it
interferes with the original memory and so distorts its accuracy. E.g., in the 2 nd experiment
(Loftus + Palmer) where ppts who heard the word ‘smashed’ reported seeing broken glass (even
though there was none). Showing how the wording of a leading question can change the ppts
memory of the film.
Post event discussion
- Eyewitnesses to a crime may sometimes discuss their experiences and memories with
each other. Leading them to combine other people’s memories with their own,
contaminating or reconstructing their own memory.
Gabbert et al (2003)
- Showed pairs of participants a crime from different perspectives
Leading questions
- Questions that point to a certain answer because of how they are phrased.
Loftus and Palmer (car crash) 1974
- Investigated how leading questions influence an eyewitness’s memory for that event.
- 45 American university students in a lab experiment
- shown clips of car accidents and then asked questions about it.
- Participants were split into 5 groups of 9 and given a questionnaire with one leading
question.
- “How fast were the cars going when they ‘….’ Each other”
- Each group was given a different leading verb: smashed, contacted, bumped, collided,
hit.
Findings
- ‘contacted’ resulted in a mean estimated speed of 31.8mph
- ‘smashed’ resulted in a mean estimated speed of 40.5mph
Loftus and Palmer conducted a 2nd study (week later)
- Supported the substitution explanation which proposes that the wording of a leading
question changes the participants memory of the film clip.
- Participants were asked if there “was any broken glass?” in a series of questions.
- Participants in smashed condition said yes.
- Concluded the leading question changed/ reconstructed the expected memory.
Participants who heard the word smashed were more likely to say they had seen broken
glass when there wasn’t any.
How leading questions affect EWT
response-bias explanation wording of a question has no long-term effect on participant
memories but influences how they decide to answer. E.g., when they hear the word ‘smashed’ it
encourages them to choose a higher speed estimate.
substitution explanation the wording of a question does affect eyewitness memory; it
interferes with the original memory and so distorts its accuracy. E.g., in the 2 nd experiment
(Loftus + Palmer) where ppts who heard the word ‘smashed’ reported seeing broken glass (even
though there was none). Showing how the wording of a leading question can change the ppts
memory of the film.
Post event discussion
- Eyewitnesses to a crime may sometimes discuss their experiences and memories with
each other. Leading them to combine other people’s memories with their own,
contaminating or reconstructing their own memory.
Gabbert et al (2003)
- Showed pairs of participants a crime from different perspectives
