Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
- Created by: Emma
- Created on: 15-05-14 15:05
View mindmap
- Yuille and Cutshall (1986)
- Background
- Real witnesses of a real gun shooting
- It is more of a case study because it looks at a particular crime
- Vancouver, Canada
- Aims
- to record and evaluate witness accounts
- To examine issues raised by laboratory research
- to look at witness verbatim accounts
- Procedure
- Participants
- 13 agreed to take part
- Interview Procedure
- The police interviewed witnesses and recorded it by hand.
- Each witness was asked to describe the event
- The police interview reports were verbatim
- 4 to 5 months later they were interviewed by the researchers
- Research interviews were recorded on audiotape and transcibed
- Research interview followed the same procedure as the police interview
- In the research interview two misleading quesetions were added
- The research interview also asked about the degree of stress that witnesses experienced
- They were asked if they had any problems afterwards
- Scoring Procedure
- A careful scoring procedure was used
- This was to help with comparing the two different interviews
- It was divided into action and description details
- Description details were then split into object and people descriptions
- Participants
- Results
- The research interview gathered more information than the police interview
- Police achieved more action details
- Both groups had equal accuray in recall
- Witnesses were still accurate after 4 to 5 months after the event
- Misleading questions had little effect on answers
- Conclusion
- Findings show that witnesses are not inaccurate in their accounts
- They may have been studying flashbulb memory
- Stress did not effect accounts
- Evaluation
- Strengths
- It has a high validity because it looks at real witnesses and real events
- Findings are also reliable
- Weaknesses
- There are problems with generalising
- Could be influenced by researcher bias
- Strengths
- Background
Comments
No comments have yet been made