Reconstruction of an automobile destruction

Authors Avatar

                        -  -

The affect of leading questions upon recall of a previous event

Jessica Allen, Katie Hodgkinson, Anna Jenkyns and Sarah Mitchell,

Abstract

Background

There has been much debate about the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness testimony. In particular, many studies have investigated the effects of presenting eyewitnesses with misleading information either before or after the witnessed event. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that subsequent questioning, and the use of ‘leading questions’ can influence the memory of eyewitnesses.

Aim

The aim of the study was to replicate the study of Loftus and Palmer (1974), in which they investigated the effects of leading questions on their participants’ memory of a particular event, in this case a car crash.

Method

After conducting a pilot study, thirty university students were randomly allocated to different groups: bumped, collided or smashed. Each group was shown the same video of a car crash and were subsequently asked to fill out a questionnaire. All questions were the same for each group, apart from one question where the verb was changed, “How fast did you perceive the car to be travelling when it (bumped/collided/smashed) into the other car?”

Results

The analytical comparisons of the ANOVA showed that there was no significant difference between the mean estimations in the bumped and collided conditions, F (2,9) = 1.20, p<0.05, and there was a significant difference for the collided and smashed groups, F (2,9) = 5.79, p>0.05. By looking at the mean results for each condition, it was clear to see that when the verb ‘smashed’ was used, the estimation of speed was highest. It was lowest when the verb ‘bumped’ was used.

Conclusions

The results of this report are consistent with the hypothesis that when eyewitnesses are asked misleading questions after an event, it can cause an alteration of the original memory of the event. The findings would suggest that eyewitness testimonies might not always be reliable.

Introduction

        Within the criminal justice system many methods are adopted to investigate information about a crime or criminal, such as, forensics, cross examination, interviews, identification parades and eye witness testimony.

        Criminal psychology looks into the effectiveness of these methods employed and psychological research has been known to lead to changes to the way in which the criminal justice system operates.

        One area of focus for criminal psychologists is that of eye witness testimony and its level of reliability. It has been of great concern to what extent the evidence from eye witnesses can be depended upon when convicting a criminal. Eyewitness testimony is the ability to recollect an event after it has occurred and give a statement of what has been recalled in a court-room situation. This method is frequently used within the criminal justice system for the prosecution of individuals: therefore the accuracy of an eyewitness testimony is invaluable. However, reporting details of numerical importance (e.g. speed and distance) in a situation like this has been found to be very inaccurate (Bird and Whipple, 1927, 1909). Many false imprisonments have been caused by false testimonies and faulty eyewitness reports. This study demonstrates the inaccuracy of an eyewitness' judgement of speed - this factor is considered to be particularly hard to judge. This is part of the reason for such wide variations in eyewitness reports of car accidents.

            A key question regarding eyewitness testimony is: 'which variables can cause such inaccurate recollections of events?' one such variable is thought to be leading questions, "One that, either by its form or content, suggests to the witness what answer is desired it leads him to the desired answer" (Loftus and Palmer, 1974). In other words, the way a question is formed can have an effect on the response given because the individual has been influenced by the question.

Join now!

        In 1974 Loftus and Palmer conducted a study to test their theory; that leading questions can have a significant affect upon later recall especially that of eye-witness testimony. Their study involved participants watching a short video of a car crash. Subsequent questions were then asked, including estimating the speed of the vehicle involved in the accident. The question was "about how fast was the car travelling when it smashed into the other car?" Certain participants received this question, others had the same question but the word 'smashed' was replaced with either contacted, hit, bumped or collided. Results revealed a correlation; ...

This is a preview of the whole essay