Summary
Summary Problem 1 to 7 - Elective Legal Psychology
- Course
- Institution
Summary Problem 1 to problem 7- Elective Legal Psychology 3.3 + some lecture notes!
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
itsross
Reviews received
Content preview
Problem 1TRUE AND FALSE MEMORIES IN FORENSIC CONTEXTS – GITLIN ET AL.
(2019)
Witness memory: Constructed and reconstructed
People experiencing complex events (e.g., Crime) acquire pieces of information
from the environment that are combined with other material to form a memory of
the event
o Verbatim (actual) details may not be stored, and they will fade quickly
Memory (e.g., Schemas)
Information from external sources (e.g., Other witness, interview
questions)
Information generated from thinking about the event afterwards
Memories are fluid and can change overtime; at the retrieval the event is
reconstructed
o The reconstruction can take many forms as trying to fit old (removed) and
new information (added) into a coherent story It results in a different
story compared to the original event
o Traumatic/highly emotional memories are more likely to be recalled and
are often more reliable, but they involve similar basic cognitive processes
of construction and reconstruction
Misinformation effects and false memories
Misinformation effect = Witness can be misled by suggestive forces (e.g.,
Questions, speculation) to report false details and information of experienced
events
o Retroactive interference = Information after distorting the memory
o People likely to recollect things when they are schema-consistent (e.g.,
Airplane crash-fires)
o Rich false memories = False memories detailed, great deal of emotions
and confidently held
These memories can happen under strongly suggestive conditions,
and distorting a memory is easier than planting/erasing memory
(e.g., False memory about committing a crime) Difficult for
observers to identify as false
FACTORS IN MEMORY DISTORION AND FALSE MEMORIES
1. Post event information = Information encountered after the event can
influence subsequent remembering, especially if the original memory was poorly
stored
o It is difficult to verify the validity of post-event information Less likely to
be rejected
o The information can be integrated as part of the original experience (often
unconsciously)
o Sources of misinformation:
Co-witness influence = Hearing other witnesses’ testimony can
lead to strengthening your own memory or contaminate it;
especially when memory is weak, and the other person has a
different viewpoint of the event
Memory conformity = The memories of witness become
more similar overtime, especially when the witnesses know
each other beforehand
, Questioning witnesses = The method of questioning a witness
affects the accuracy of reports and memory for the events; people
look schema-consistent information
Forced confabulation effect = Asking for the same questions
despite receiving an answer suggest that the witness is
wrong, and they may feel pressure to produce a “correct
memory”
Visuals = Visuals (e.g., Photographs and videos) can easily trigger
memories for past events that have been forgotten but combined
with other suggestive technique can contribute to the creation of
false memories
2. Retention interval = The longer the interval between an event and the time
witnesses have to provide an account, the more likely the account will have
significant distortion. The nature of recollection is important: when the event
occurred (childhood/adulthood), how many times the event occurrent etc.
3. Imagination/visualization = Imagination inflation: Process in which people
imagine non-experienced events, that can result and lead to false memories;
amplified by repeatedly visualizing, thinking and speculating about it
4. Event plausibility = Having knowledge about how an event occurs, possessing
schema-relevant information and whether an event is likely to occur or not
influence whether a false memory can be implemented
5. Inconsistency within and across interviews = Giving inconsistent accounts
does not necessarily indicate inaccuracy. Psychologists categorize inconsistencies
as:
o Direct contradictions = Conflicting responses Least reliable
o Reminisce = More recall, additional details
o Omissions = Forgetting, less detail
Cognitive processes in memory errors and false memories
1. Source memory errors = Source memory judgment: Memory trace is created
when people remember or experience something but how people get confused
from the memory source errors occur; this is more likely when they have
characteristics of true memories (e.g., Vivid, detailed etc.)
2. Gist and verbatim memory traces = Fuzzy trace theory suggests that when
someone experiences an event, two memories are created
o Verbatim memory – Detailed, actual memory, quickly forgotten
o Gist memory – General interpretation about the experience/belief has
happened
Less detailed
Fades less quickly
Stronger memory traces
Easier to create false memories because it involves beliefs
3. Individual differences = Some people are more likely to create false memories
than others
o Developmental factors (Age)
o Cognitive factors (e.g., Intelligence)
o Personality (e.g., Suggestible)
o Psychopathy (e.g., Dissociative identity disorder)
Protocols to promote quality memory reports
There are two protocols suited to reduce the likelihood of misinformation effects
and false memories
o Cognitive Interview (CI) = All groups
o National Institute of Child Health and Human Development protocol
(NICHD) = Children
, [Self-Administered Interview (SAI) = Self-administered]
Principles:
Rapport and transfer of control = To break down psychological barriers (e.g.
Distress when talking to authorities) rapport-building is important; the legal
professional is interested in the person, listens actively and suggest that will be
relying on the witness to play an active role (=firsthand knowledge)
Question types and memory retrieval techniques = Witnesses are asked to
mentally recreate the context in which the event took place; then the professional
asks openended questions to prompt a narrative response. Suggestive techniques
are avoided as much as possible with multiple searches of the same details
without social pressure
Protocols to discriminate between true and false memories
Techniques used to assess true or false memories
o Criteria-Based Content Analysis (CBCA)
o Reality Monotoring Framework (RM)
With the exclusion of ‘rich false memories’ it is possible to
identify memories of suggested false events, but more research
is needed to fully understand the constraints in using these
techniques
o I-I-Eye Method
Used to determine potential suggestibility in interviews
IMAGINATION AND CREATE FALSE AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL MEMORIES –
MAZZONI & MEMON (2003)
Aim: Examine whether imagining an event can create false memories in a sample of 82
British students
Imagination-inflation = Imagining an event increases the false belief that it has
happened
o Non-believed memory = When memory higher than belief (e.g.,
Remembering you are born)
o In most studies participants are asked to rate the likelihood that they have
experienced a set of events on the Life Events Inventory (LEI)
Imagination inflation is the increase in ratings for imagined items (=
people believe an event has occurred)
The study examined whether:
1. Imagination (without suggestive procedure) produce false memories and the
belief an event happened
2. Imagination elicit memories for events that could not have happened to the
participants
3. Imagination per se responsible for changes in belief and memory
Method
1. Mass-testing = Filling out 1st version of LEI
2. Random assignment to one of two groups:
o Group 1 = Imagining a frequent event (tooth extracted), reading a passage
and answering questions about non-occurring event (skin sample removed)
o Group 2 = Imagining non-occurring event (skin), reading passage and
answering questions about frequent event (tooth)
, Filled out 2nd version of the LEI, vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire
(VVIQ) and Dissociative Experience Scale (DES)
3. Filling out 3rd version of LEI
Results and discussion
Autobiographical beliefs:
o Increase in autobiographical belief in the imagination condition
o Decrease in autobiographical belief in the control condition
o No significant changes in exposure condition
Memory:
o More memories in the imagination than exposure condition
o More memories of the frequent event (tooth) than the non-occurring event
(skin)
o Memories of skin event were 4 times more likely after imagination than
after exposure to information
Conclusion
People can develop both a belief and a memory of an event that did not happen
to them by imagining its occurrence: it increase participants’ convictions of an
event that had occurred and produce false memories of the event
Production of false belief and memories were not caused by an increase in
familiarity with the event
Effect of imagination on memory is genuine and not an artifact
THE EFFECT OF ACUTE STRESS ON EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY – MARR
ET AL. (2021)
Acute stress = Subjective psychological responses and biological reactions
o Physiological activation of the HPA axis Release of cortisol from the
adrenal glands
o Mixed findings on the topic of stress and cognition due to methodological
differences
Methodological divergences:
Eye-witness memory field Fundamental memory field
= Effects of stress on memory = Effects of stress of memory
in forensic contexts
Stressor type Application-focused or scenario Laboratory stressors: CPT, TSST,
relevant stressors: arousing MAST
pictures/videos, electric shocks
Manipulation Self-reported stress Physiological measures: blood
check pressure, health rate etc. and
HPA axis activation: cortisol
levels
Retention Single session design – Two session design – Encoding
interval Encoding and retrieval within and retrieval spaced by at least
minutes or hours one day
Stressor timing Encoding during stressor; Post-stress encoding; encoding
encoding and stressor occur occurs 15/20 minutes post-
simultaneously stressor during cortisol peak
Participant Few exclusion criteria, most Substantial exclusion criteria
details participants are included (stress hormone related): sex,
smoking, contraceptive or
medication use, vaccinations,
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 EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit 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 this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller itsross. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R138,09. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
84669 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now