Exam (elaborations)
criminological psychology 15 essays
- Institution
- PEARSON (PEARSON)
15 essays on 15 extended response questions, including PEEL paragraphs and conclusion covering most topics in criminological psychology
[Show more]
Content preview
Crim. essaysPractice
Evaluate the classic study by Loftus and Palmer (1974). (8)
One strength of Loftus and Palmer (1974) is that it has good internal validity. The
aim was to investigate whether leading questions would influence the participants’
estimates of speed of the vehicle in the car crash. 45 students in total were divided up
into 5 groups of 9, and watched a short film clip of a car crash. Then, the students had
to complete a questionnaire, in which there was a critical question about estimating the
speed of the car before the car crash. Each group was exposed to a different verb
describing the collision between the cars, such as “smashed”, “hit, or “contacted”. The
critical question was randomly allocated among other questions. This would have
prevented the participants from guessing the aim of the study, hence this minimises the
likelihood of demand characteristics. This means that the likelihood of the response
given being due to the research methodology employed by the study was lowered. This
is a strength as it makes the experiment more internally valid, implying that the
estimates of speed of the participants can be relied on as it was likely to be genuine.
Regardless, students were tested, who had limited experience of car speeds, therefore it
may have been hard for them to accurately distinguish the speed of the cars just from
watching the film clip. This means that they could have more likely been influenced by
the verb used in the critical question than if there were the case if a different population
with more experience of driving was used. This displays the limited generalizability of
this sample of students to the general population, in which the use of cars would be
common. As a result, it is not certain whether the use of leading questions would
influence most people or just students uncertain of the car speeds as they had little or
no driving experience.
, 2
One weakness of Loftus and Palmer (1974) is that it has low ecological validity.
Findings show that the group expose to the verb “smashed” in the critical question
(“How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other”) estimated a higher
speed of 40.5 mph compared to that estimated by the group exposed to the verb “hit” in
the critical question, which is 31.8 mph. From this it can be concluded that the change
in the word significantly affected the witness’s answer to the question, as the wording
might have caused a change in the memory of the car crash, leading to them recalling it
as being more severe than it really was. This would indicate that leading questions have
more effect on people who are uncertain of their memory and have certain schemas
which become easily activated by the suggestible answer suggested by the leading
question. However, the task of watching a film clip is unlikely to induce the same
emotional strain as that of an eyewitness, hence lacking in mundane realism. This is
because eyewitnesses in real life are subject to high stress and arousal, which could
also affect their recall and memory, thereby they could respond differently to leading
questions by the police or legal professionals. This is a weakness because this study
doesn’t tell us if leading questions affect memory in real life, as participants were in an
unnatural environment. Nonetheless, if leading questions do affect memory recall of
eyewitnesses as suggested by this study, then this has wider implications for the legal
system, in particular for police interviews where the use of leading questions could be
prevented in order to obtain an accurate account of the incident from the eyewitness. In
fact, cognitive interviews have adapted this change of not including leading questions,
and are demonstrated to be more effective than standard interviews in eyewitness
recall of the events.
Overall, Loftus and Palmer (1974) has demonstrated how leading questions can
activate certain schemas in the eyewitnesses about the car crash, which lead them to
recall it differently than what was seen in the film clip. These findings could be relied on
due to the high internal validity of the study, ensuring participants don’t change their
behaviour or level of attention by guessing the aim of the experiment. However, it is
doubtful whether these findings actually represent memory recall after the use of
leading questions, since participants were in an artificial environment which doesn’t
arouse as much stress as in real life accidents, therefore this might affect recall
differently compared to that if the environment was in real-life. From this, it is possible
to conclude that memory recall in real life might be more complicated as this study
suggests, as it may be subject to many more variables such as stress, environment, and
, 3
participant variables. Therefore, we must be cautious in assuming that leading
questions do change the memory of eyewitnesses, when in real life they may not.
To what extent can brain injury explain criminal and antisocial
behaviour (12)
On the one hand, brain injury may help to explain the development of crime and
antisocial behaviour. The most common form of brain injury is traumatic brain injury as
a result of physical trauma on the brain. This could come from accidents, falls or illness
such as a stroke or tumour. If TBI occurs at a young age, the person may be unable to
learn appropriate social behaviour and how to interpret behaviour. Williams et al. (2010)
found that 60% of 196 prisoners had TBI due to falling, car accidents and sports
activities. Most of them were younger at entry into the prison systems and there were
higher rates of repeat offending. This suggests that TBI affects development of
temperament, social judgement and control of impulses since most of the young
prisoners with TBI continued to offend, which may mean they were not able to learn
appropriate social behaviour. This is important as it indicates that TBI may be a
potential risk factor for recidivism and criminal behaviour. Nonetheless, other factors
should be considered as well, such as substance misuse, pre-existing personality
disorders and exposure to violence at an early age. This is because all of these factors
are also associated with violence, which may increase the person’s susceptibility to
criminal behaviour. For example, TBI may affect development of temperance, leading to
more alcohol being consumed by the individual, which affects their central nervous
system and impairs their balance and decision making. This may lead to the individual
being less likely to judge which behaviour may be appropriate to display and which is
not, thus potentially resulting in criminal and antisocial behaviour. This means that TBI
may not directly cause criminal behaviour, but may contribute to it.
However, contradicting evidence suggests that TBI may not be a significant risk
factor in crime and antisocial behaviour. The consequences of TBi are dependent on the
area of the brain injured. For example, if the amygdala is injured, the individual may be
unable to control violent impulses since the amygdala is involved in emotional control.
Kreutzer et al. (1991) found that 20% of 74 patients suffering from TBI, were arrested
pre-injury, whilst 10% was arrested post-injury. Most arrests were after use of alcohol or
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller erikakumar. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £2.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
53340 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now