The Quality Of Eyewitness Memory

One of the reasons that eyewitness evidence is so unreliable is because human memory is very open to suggestion. In fact, just asking about something can alter our memory. (1) For example, in the 80-90’s, many psychotherapists were

Eyewitness testimonies are based on a person’s ability to recall what took place accurately. Memory research has proven that a person’s memory is not a recording but it is reconstructive. Loftus and Palmer’s study set out to prove that the memory could be reconstructed through the use of language.

An eyewitness can change the course of an investigation. However, how reliable that can be? People believe that we remember an event as exactly as it was, such as replaying the facts. Elizabeth Loftus is one of the leading researchers in the area of memory, and she found that memories are not accurately re-created. Reconstructing facts from our lives cannot be harmful, but it can be critical when deciding a criminal event. Loftus studies demonstrated that a simple wording question might change the eyewitness answer.

Researcher Elizabeth Loftus, encapsulated the reliability of human memory and the notion about the inaccuracy of eyewitness accounts. She hypothesized that if eyewitnesses are asked questions with false presuppositions, the erroneous information will be incorporated into the witness’s memory and alter the memory of the witnessed event.

Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has been particularly concerned with how subsequent information can affect an eyewitness’s account of an event. The fact the eyewitness testimony can be unreliable and influenced by leading questions is illustrated by the psychology study by Loftus and Palmer (1974). The aim of the study was to test their hypothesis that the language used in eyewitness testimony can alter memory. To test this, Loftus and Palmer asked people to estimate the speed of motor vehicles using different forms of questions.

In sum, we can conclude that eyewitness memory still hold important place in investigation and prosecution process yet it is flawed. Based on research that I reviewed in this paper, there are several aspects that important to enhance eyewitness memory such as the repetition and precision-accuracy trade off. In contrast there are some factors that can threatens quality of memory such as such as avoiding co-witness situation, less focus on the confidence level to measure accuracy and delayed effect. These factors need to be prioritize to create a better environment to recall accurate information.

A lawyer may use the research that shows eye witness’s memory for details of crimes contains significant errors when evaluating their testimonies to show that they may be confused or lying. Eye witnesses are unreliable because when they are held under pressure they tend to forget the important details. “When a criminal perpetrator displays a knife or gun, a witness pays less attention to other details of the crime making them less likely to recall what actually occurred.” (pg. 223) This means the lawyer could state that the eye witness was too distracted by the danger of their life rather than watching what actually happened. “One reason eyewitnesses are prone to memory-related errors is that the specific wording of question posed to them by

Research into false memory has been carried out to determine how reliable the memory can be. Loftus (2003) looked at eyewitness memory and how accurate it can be. In one study Loftus showed films of traffic

Human memory is a complex system that encodes, stores, and retrieves information. Encoding involves two types of rehearsal: maintenance rehearsal, which is reciting the information, and relational or elaborative rehearsal, which is thinking about what the information means and how it relates to what you already know (Reisberg, 2016). Active encoding helps short-term memory transfer to long-term memory. Next, storage involves holding the information until it is needed, which brings us to retrieval. Retrieval happens when you remember the information; it requires first finding the information in storage and then bringing it to the surface. Errors in any one of these processes can result in error in memory which has large implications for eyewitness identification in the criminal justice system. During a criminal investigation, the police seek out eyewitnesses to better understand what happened and who committed the crime. The eyewitness may assist in making a sketch of the assailant and might be asked to look

Verbal overshadowing has been coined as the undependable eyewitness testimonials of explicit memories resultant of the cognitive barriers to a person’s inability to accurately verbalize or depict the events that have transpired. To illustrate the inaccuracies caused by verbal overshadowing, if it even exists, we conducted a study to demonstrate the differences in a person’s cognitive ability to accurately identify a perpetrator that has committed a crime in a police lineup (Schooler & Engstler-Schooler, 1990). Participants were provided a brief video clip of a perpetrator committing a crime, and data retrieval were manipulated between two conditions: a one-week delay in description retrieval, and half hour delay in description retrieval of the perpetrator’s identity. Although immediate retrieval is coined as the best technique to providing an accurate description, many argue the immediate retrieval may contribute to the effects of verbal overshadowing. In essence, all eyewitness remembrance is predominately terrible, no matter the individual providing the description (also see, Brown C., Lloyd-Jones, T. J., & Robinson, M.,

The results of our experiment were similar with the original study conducted by Loftus and Palmer in the sense that the average speed estimates were higher in the "smash" condition. The smash condition had average estimated speed of, 79.6 km/h in the present experiment and 40.8km/h in the original study. Similarly, the contacted condition had an average estimated speed of 72.3km/h in the present experiment and 31.8km/h in the original study. Due to the results of Loftus and Palmer as well as our experiment, it is evident that Schemas do alter responses and behaviours regarding memory and eyewitness testimony. The participants were tested on their response to a leading question and behaved as expected. Through this, we can conclude that the

An Article Review of “Memory blindness: Altered memory reports lead to distortion in eyewitness memory” by Cochran et al. (2016)

Memory does not work like a video camera, smoothly recording every detail. Instead, memory is more of a constructive process. We remember the details that we find most important and relevant. Due to the reconstructive nature of memory, the assimilation of old and new information has the ability to cause vulnerable memories to become distorted. This is also known as the misinformation effect (Loftus, 1997). It is not uncommon for individuals to fill in memory gaps with what they assume they must have experienced. We not only distort memories for events that we have observed, but, we may also have false memories for events that never occurred at all. False memories are “often created by combing actual memories with suggestions received from

Memory facilitates necessary functions in daily life activities, but it is not a perfect mechanism in operation. Goldstein (2011) states that memory is, “…the process involved in retaining, retrieving, and using information about stimuli, images, events, ideas, and skills after the original information is no longer present” (p.116). There are many adaptive functions within the complexities of the human memory system and the interlinked constructs between each function leave room for doubt in the accuracy of recollection. Study of the human mind has opened avenues of discovery on the inner workings of our brains and the resulting knowledge suggests that humans are prone to creating false memories and even remembering things that never actually happened. A great deal of information has been written explaining the nature of memory errors and within the following pages a real-life case offers a glimpse into how recall distortions and memory errors can wield unpleasant consequences. Memory errors can be avoided with a significant effort, but the truth remains that no one is perfect and memories are subject to individual bias.

The misinformation effect became prevalent in psychology during the 1970s when Elizabeth Loftus conducted research showing that individuals can form memories of events that never transpired by having events suggested to them (Leding, 2009). The customary misinformation paradigm