Identity parades: 1 group told "correct", 2nd group told "wrong", 3rd group told nothing. All incorrect. Those who where told correct were more willing to testify (police reactions affect witness testomony)
1 of 22
Fisher (1989) SI
Standard interview: range of problems incl numerous interruptions, over reliance on short answer Qs (less detail)
2 of 22
Fisher (1989) CI
Cognitive interview: 30% improvement in recall w/no interruptions. 47% more info recorded when police trained in CI.
3 of 22
Cognitive interview stages (4)
Context reinstatement, in-depth reporting, narrative re-ordering and reporting from different perspectives.
Positive confrontation, theme development, handling denials, overcoming objections, retention of suspects attention, handling sus passive mood, presenting alternate Q, gain confession, convert confession to written.
6 of 22
Criticisms of Reid technique?
May lead to coerced false confessions
7 of 22
Gudjonsson (2003)
4 factors to ensure confession was not coerced: defendent, arrest, mental/physical state, interrogation.
8 of 22
GSS?
Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale: If a suspect scores highly, more likely to be a false confession
Problems with forensic hypnosis: increased errors, alteration of true memories, ease that false info can be suggested and accepted + ease with which people can lie.
11 of 22
Stewart (1985)
60 crim trials, rated defendents on physical attractiveness, neatness, cleanliness and qual of dress. Found the less attractive = more severe punishment.
12 of 22
Sigall and Ostrove (1975)
Ppts suggested signif longer sentences for burglary when the desc of defendent was unattractive but the reverse when it was fraud (defendent misused their 'gift' of beauty)
13 of 22
Pfiefer and Ogloff (1991)
White uni students rated black defendents more likely to be guilty over white defendents, esp when victim was white.
14 of 22
Halo effect?
Attractive = good
15 of 22
Penrod and Cutler (1995)
Key female witness: 80 or 100% sure. When 80% sure, ppts gave 60% guilty verdict whereas in 100% condition ppts gave guilty verdict 67% of the time. (Witness confidence influences jury)
16 of 22
Lakoff (1975)
Using hedges + tag Qs + intonations is seen as less intelligent, less competent, less likeable and less believeable.
17 of 22
Mahoney + Dixon (1997)
Black-brummie accent = most guilty of all crimes esp. blue collar crimes.
18 of 22
Seggie (1983)
More guilt attached to the broad Australian accent when accused of blue collar crime, more guilt attached to RP accent when suspect accused of white collar crime.
19 of 22
Loftus (1974)
1: EWT saw defendent (72% guilty) 2: no EWT (18% guilty) 3: Discredited EWT (68% guilty). EWT=influential, even if it's discredited.
20 of 22
Cutler (1989)
Expert witnesses effect jury
21 of 22
Pennington + Hastie (1988)
Presenting in story order was more persuasive than presenting in witness order but if both sides do this the effect is neutralised.
22 of 22
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Fisher (1989) SI
Back
Standard interview: range of problems incl numerous interruptions, over reliance on short answer Qs (less detail)
Comments
No comments have yet been made