◘ Schemas can affect memory in a number of different ways.
-
We tend to ignore information that is incompatible with our existing schemas.
-
We remember the gist of events but not necessarily the details.
-
We use schema-based knowledge to interpret current situations and fill in the gaps in our memory.
-
Memories may be distorted so that events map on to existing schemas, e.g. if we have a stereotype that robbers wear masks we may as witnesses report seeing a mask worn when in fact the robber wore dark glasses or goggles.
-
We use schemas to help us guess what probably happened when we cannot really remember.
Evaluation of Reconstructive Theory of Memory
◘ It has proven difficult to replicate Bartlett’s findings in more naturalistic settings.
◘ There is some criticism about the failure to explain exactly how schemas are acquired in the first place.
◘ There is seldom any direct evidence that participants actually possess the schemas assumed to lead to their inaccurate memories.
◘ Schema theory is criticised for implying that memory is usually inaccurate, whereas many events and much information are remembered accurately.
Leading Questions
◘ Language used to question witnesses can alter what they remember. It is argued that information given after the event (in the form of how questions are worded) may actually change the memory stored for the event.
◘ In a study it was found that the word used in the question affected the speed at which people estimated a car to be travelling (e.g. ‘smashed’ or ‘hit’).
◘ Even tiny changes in the language used in questioning may affect what witnesses recall (e.g. ‘the or ‘a’).
◘ However Loftus has also shown that witnesses are not misled if the post-event misinformation is too blatantly incorrect.
◘ Misleading post-event information is more likely to be accepted as more time passes since the original incident.
Fear and Anxiety
◘ Based on his clinical experience, Freud proposed that people forget about some events because they provoke too much anxiety. The events, he believed, were so traumatic that they were forced out f consciousness.
◘ It is obviously unacceptable for researchers to traumatise their participants in order to test the validity of Freud’s observations.
However, because eyewitnesses who give evidence to the police or the courts are sometimes trying to recall events where they were frightened, researchers have been very interested.
Evaluation of Research on Fear and Anxiety
◘ Ethical concerns have been raised by the ‘weapon focus’ experiment.
◘ A few other studies have supported Loftus’ findings but these studies have exposed participants to only mildly upsetting experiences.
◘ More recently, Christianson and Hubinette showed that victims of real crimes make more accurate eyewitnesses than bystanders. It appears that people can recall highly stressful events in real life.
Face Recognition
Often eyewitnesses are called upon to identify or describe someone.
Factors Affecting Face Recognition
◘ Familiarity: people are fairly good at recognising familiar faces but poor at recognising a face seen only once. Bruce and Young proposed two different mechanisms for identifying familiar and unfamiliar faces. They suggest that it is feature detection (information about individual features) that is used to recognise an unfamiliar face. On the other hand, we are more influenced by the overall arrangement of a familiar person’s features, i.e. the configuration of their facial characteristics.
◘ Distinctiveness: not surprisingly, people find it easier to recognise highly distinctive faces compared with typical, ‘ordinary’ faces.
◘ Stereotypes: although there is no evidence to relate facial features to personality, people are prone, nevertheless, to make the link believing that certain facial characteristics are associated with criminality.
◘ Recalling faces: it is more difficult to recall someone’s face than to recognise it. The police often try to construct Identikit (photo fit) pictures with the help of witnesses using an assortment of features. However, the technique is not very successful in producing recognition probably because the pictures are motionless, lacking emotion, and are constructed through a procedure that involves breaking down a face into its individual features. We normally perceive faces as configurations (holistic patterns), not fragmented components. Christie and Ellis found that faces were better recognised from verbal descriptions than from Identikit pictures.
Improving Eyewitness Testimony
The Cognitive Interview
◘ Devised by Geiselman et al, the cognitive interview is technique used by the police to elicit more accurate information from witnesses. During the interview the witness is encouraged to:
-
recreate the context of the original event by imagining the setting (this relates to context-dependent memory)
-
report every detail about the incident, no matter how fragmented or apparently irrelevant
-
recall the event in different orders, e.g. start part way through and work forwards or back
-
recall the event from different perspectives such as imagining what other witnesses would have seen
◘ During police interviews with witnesses it is now standard procedure to:
- minimise distractions
- allow witnesses to proceed at their own pace
- try to reduce witness anxiety
- avoid interrupting or leading witnesses
Evaluation of the Cognitive Interview
◘ The cognitive interview has been a valuable contribution by cognitive psychologists to enhancing eyewitnesses’ recollections
◘ A review of laboratory and field studies found that the cognitive interview produced up to 35% more correct information than the standard interview procedure.
◘ The cognitive interview is most effective at improving recall if it is used fairly soon after the event.
