Human 's Helpful Nature Can Sometimes Do More Harm Than Good

864 Words Nov 11th, 2015 4 Pages
Humans prove to be extremely influential, whether it is answering a question in an interview, or recollecting every detail about a crime, their answers can be impacted by the actions of the interviewer. Human’s helpful nature can sometimes do more harm than good.
Often in times a witness trying to be more helpful by recollecting things they do not remember can have dire consequences, such as a conviction of the wrong person. During the experiment conducted by Elizabeth Loftus, many people were asked about details about a crime committed, each question dictated a different answer depending on two things; how the question is asked, and who asked the question (Eyewitness testimony: Psychological aspects, 2009).
There are many positive uses for open-ended, as well as closed-ended questions, both have their place at specific moments in an interview. Open-ended questions can be extremely useful to get a substantial amount of information, but they are not always the best ways to ask specific questions. Closed-ended questions can allow an interviewer to control the interview more easily. Interviewers can control an interview in many ways, most of these controls are positive aspects to an interview; one thing an interviewer should not control however, is the answers being given. This is referred to as leading, leading questions can control the witness to say exactly what the interviewer is hoping for them to say, which can conclude in a wrongful conviction. Asking a question that…
Open Document