False Memory And Eyewitness Testimony

Given these findings, it suggests that if an unfamiliar story can be re-told with significant changes by all those who participated in the study, a statement given by an eyewitness is subject to the same results (Leinfelt, 2004). Having considered Bartlett’s research in 1932, it is also reasonable to consider the criticism of Gauld and Stephenson (1967), as they discovered if the participants were told of the importance of accurate recall, the number of errors made in the re-telling was notably reduced. Arguably, real life cases and laboratory findings have shown that although eyewitnesses understand the importance of accuracy, recall is not without error (Tversky & Tuchin, 1989).

I recently watched a YouTube documentary that focused on both false testimonies by children and memory. Stephen Ceci, a psychologist, studies the accuracy of children's courtroom testimony, particularly in cases claiming physical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect (Park Productions, 2012). In this documentary, he was called in court as an expert who studies children to state whether the child was telling the truth or dishonest. The cases he worked with were from the late 1980s to the 2000s. Psychologist Stephen Ceci, researched that children who are questioned using suggestible language are prone to implant the topic of question into their minds and will eventually become a false memory. There is one particular study in which he experimented

The mode of implantation from the researchers included telling the participants multiple accurate childhood memories and would include one false memory (Loftus, 1997). The researchers validated the memories told to the participants by informing each participant that their parent(s) had been spoken to and those memories had been offered up (Loftus, 1997). Some of the false memories included being lost in a shopping mall when younger or spilling a drink onto the dress of a bride at a wedding (Loftus, 1997). 37% of those with the implanted memories found themselves able to recall the false memory provided in great detail and were often found to contain much emotion on the part of the participant (Loftus,

Testimonies from children who have experienced sexual assault can mean the difference between guilty and not guilty verdicts for the defendant. Often times child victims are psychologically and even physically harmed jeopardizing their statements during the trial. There are a number of reasons for children to be unable to give full accounts of what has occurred to them. For the purpose of protecting child victims and making sure they are heard the courts have implemented innovations that make testifying less traumatic for children and allow for a more accurate description of the assault. Hearsay testimonies are one of the innovations that have been shown to give child victims of sexual assault the chance to be fully heard. Victims directly

Factors such as misinformation and eyewitness talk can easily affect the memory of eyewitnesses and therefore affect their testimony_. Evidence which is usually provided during eyewitness memory reports helps to determine the guilt or innocence of a perpetrator in a criminal proceeding_. With the help of many basic psychological and neuroscience studies, it has been indicated that because memory is a reconstructive process it is likely to be influenced and vulnerable to change and misinformation_. Due to memory being vulnerable, any minor memory misrepresentation can have severe consequences when used in the courtroom_. Memory errors when regarding the identification of a perpetrator of a specific crime has been focused on during research

The study of creation of false memories has been a topic of interest since the 1930s when Bartlett (1932) conducted the first experiment on the topic. Though the results of this experiment were never replicated, they contributed greatly to research by distinguishing between reproductive and reconstructive memory (Bartlett 1932 as cited in Roediger & McDermott, 1995). Reproductive memory refers to accurate production of material from memory and is assumed to be associated with remembering simplified materials (e.g., lists). Reconstructive memory emphasizes the active process of filling in missing elements while remembering and is associated with materials rich in meaning (e.g., stories).

Eyewitnesses are critical to the criminal justice system, but there have been issues involving eyewitness testimonies, which occasionally cause them to be seen as unreliable. According to innocenceproject.org, 72% of DNA exoneration cases in the United States have resulted from eyewitness misidentification. This is concerning because in a study by Benton, Ross, Bradshaw, Thomas, and Bradshaw (2005), they examined jurors, judges and law enforcement’s knowledge about eyewitness issues. They found that those involved in the legal system are still very unaware of eyewitness memory research, and the reasons behind why eyewitnesses may or may not be considered reliable. There needs to be a way to increase reliability so that eyewitnesses are able to accurately recognize perpetrators and other important information to put the guilty people away, and to keep the innocent people free.

Children’s testimonies have serious implications for the accused and the question of whether or not children are reliable sources of information have been brought to the attention of judges and cognitive psychologists. The history of court proceedings allowing child witnesses to testify has seen an increase in false accusations against teachers, friends, and family members, bringing to question as to why or how a child may come up with false memories. Psychological research into the subject has shed some light on some possibilities as to how some children may be susceptible to manipulations.

Moreover, research also examined the effects of age on participants in regards to the onset of false memory. With materials and testing procedures that have been repeatedly found to produce higher levels of false memory, older children are more susceptible to generating false memories than younger children (Holliday, Brainerd & Reyna, 2010). This is particularly realistic in the DRM lists (Holliday, Brainerd &

Neurobiological studies show that both suppression and recall and the creation of false memories are possible. (Kandel, 1994) In this paper both sides of the debate will be analyzed and evaluated.

A false memory is simply a memory that did not occur. An actual experience can become distorted as best illustrated by the Cog Lab experiment on false memories accessed through Argosy University. The experiment is outlined as follows: a participant is given a list of words that are highly relative in nature at a rate of about one word every 2 seconds. At the finish of the given list, the participant is then shown a list of words in which he or she is to recall the words from the original list. A special distractor is inserted to the list, and this word, although highly relative in nature, was not in the original list. For example, the

Over the last thirty years, the idea of children as witnesses and the accuracy of their testimony has been widely debated. People are asking themselves if the memories of young children, specifically between the ages of five and ten, can be accurate and in return trusted. So, can children’s memory and testimony be accurate? Prolific amounts of research have been conducted in an attempt to answer this question. Most of the research suggests that unfortunately we can not rely on their accurate recall in testimony. I would have to say I agree with the findings.

While these studies do not fully exemplify the harmful reality of false memories, they take a step towards understanding how these false memories might occur in real-world settings. As Loftus (1997) discusses, it is only natural to wonder whether or not this research is applicable to real-world situations such as being interrogated by law officers or in psychotherapy. What researchers have learned, and can apply to this practical problem is that there are social demands on individuals to remember and come up with detailed memories. Not only that, but memory construction through suggestion and imagining events has been shown to be explicitly encouraged when people are having trouble remembering events (Loftus, 1997).

False memories have been the subject of many studies since Deese (1959) investigated their effects.

Do you clearly remember something from your childhood but, your parents claim that it never happened? Well, if you answered yes, it’s actually more common than you might be thinking. About 50% of the United States population have claimed that they remember a memory that never actually happened, which can also be perceived as false memory. (HealthDay News, 2016). According to Time magazine, a false memory is when you have an apparent recollection of an event that actually never occurred. It might be easy to explain why we remember things, however psychologists are finding that it’s trickier when we claim we remember things but it simply never happened. False memories are something you want to get more knowledge about because they could be