Memory stem essay plan
Question:
A woman is being questioned by a police officer about a heated argument she witnessed on an evening out
with friends. The argument took place in a bar and ended with a violent assault. A knife was discovered later by
police in the car park of the bar.
‘Did you see the knife the attacker was holding?’, asked the police officer.
‘I’m not sure there was a knife – yes, there probably was,’ replied the woman. ‘I was so scared at the time that
it’s hard to remember, and my friends and I have talked about what happened so many times since that I’m
almost not sure what I did see.’
Discuss research into two or more factors that affect the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Refer to the
information above in your answer. (16 marks)
Plan:
CONTENT
Leading questions - Loftus and Leading question = “did you see
Palmer (summarise study: the knife” rather than “did you
videos of cars crashing, asked see a knife” - this seems to
them questions with different have caused response bias in
verbs in the place of ‘crash’ → that she wasn’t sure but said
around 30mph vs 40mph there was anyway
Post-event discussion - Post-event discussion = with
Gabbert (summarise study: her friends, she isn’t sure what
video of crime from different she saw because of this - source
perspectives, some allowed to AO2 - How monitoring theory (can’t
AO1 - The
discuss with someone else → it links to remember which info came
theory
71% mistaken recall vs 0%) the stem from where, so combines into
one memory)
Anxiety - Johnson and Scott As there was a knife, it is likely
(summarise study: participants that the woman would have
sitting in waiting room, experienced the weapon focus
argument in next room, some effect, meaning that she
saw a person leave holding a struggled to remember the
pen, some saw a knife covered event due to the high anxiety
in blood → 49% accuracy in a levels
line up compared to 33%)
EVALUATION
P and E - the point E and L - the evaluation
Misleading information (strengths) - Strength because the research means we can
practical applications: e.g. knowledge that prevent these effects from occurring, and
leading questions can affect EWT negatively, can increase the accuracy of EWTs
as well as allowing victims/witnesses to → increases the value of the research
discuss the event before being interviewed
about it
Question:
A woman is being questioned by a police officer about a heated argument she witnessed on an evening out
with friends. The argument took place in a bar and ended with a violent assault. A knife was discovered later by
police in the car park of the bar.
‘Did you see the knife the attacker was holding?’, asked the police officer.
‘I’m not sure there was a knife – yes, there probably was,’ replied the woman. ‘I was so scared at the time that
it’s hard to remember, and my friends and I have talked about what happened so many times since that I’m
almost not sure what I did see.’
Discuss research into two or more factors that affect the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Refer to the
information above in your answer. (16 marks)
Plan:
CONTENT
Leading questions - Loftus and Leading question = “did you see
Palmer (summarise study: the knife” rather than “did you
videos of cars crashing, asked see a knife” - this seems to
them questions with different have caused response bias in
verbs in the place of ‘crash’ → that she wasn’t sure but said
around 30mph vs 40mph there was anyway
Post-event discussion - Post-event discussion = with
Gabbert (summarise study: her friends, she isn’t sure what
video of crime from different she saw because of this - source
perspectives, some allowed to AO2 - How monitoring theory (can’t
AO1 - The
discuss with someone else → it links to remember which info came
theory
71% mistaken recall vs 0%) the stem from where, so combines into
one memory)
Anxiety - Johnson and Scott As there was a knife, it is likely
(summarise study: participants that the woman would have
sitting in waiting room, experienced the weapon focus
argument in next room, some effect, meaning that she
saw a person leave holding a struggled to remember the
pen, some saw a knife covered event due to the high anxiety
in blood → 49% accuracy in a levels
line up compared to 33%)
EVALUATION
P and E - the point E and L - the evaluation
Misleading information (strengths) - Strength because the research means we can
practical applications: e.g. knowledge that prevent these effects from occurring, and
leading questions can affect EWT negatively, can increase the accuracy of EWTs
as well as allowing victims/witnesses to → increases the value of the research
discuss the event before being interviewed
about it
