Traditionally, the legal system considered memory accounts to be very reliable and a valid source of legal evidence. However, recent studies have shown that autobiographical memories are quite vulnerable to distortion and are not easily distinguishable from true memories, and thus should not be given much weight in court. Likewise, the purpose of the study conducted by Shaw and Porter (2015) was to investigate whether suggestive interrogative techniques can lead to the development of criminal false memories in an experimental setting, and whether these memories could be compared to non-criminal memories and true memories (p. 292). This study also attempted to explore the effects of corroborative evidence presented to participants by their …show more content…
For the true event, the interviewer supplied accurate cues obtained from the caregiver while inaccurate cues were randomly assigned for the false event (p.293). Given that the false event had never actually happened, none of the participants were initially able to recall it. At this point, they were encouraged to use contextual reinstatement and scripted guided imagery techniques to recover the memory, both of which “have been shown to effectively generate details that form the foundations of false memories” (p. 293). All three interviews were conducted as consistently and systematically as possible across both the criminal and non-criminal conditions. The nature of the participants’ memory was probed each time they recalled an event; follow up questions were asked about the vividness of the memory, confidence in the memory as well as perspective of the memory. After the third interview, the participants were given $50 for participation and told the second memory was false. They were asked questions pertaining to their belief in the false memory such as how often they visualized the memory and how surprised they were that the event had never happened. All participants were then …show more content…
Participants who reported 10 or more details about the false event and believed the event happened were classified as having a false memory, while participants who claimed that they did not believe the event occurred but provided 10 or more details were classified as compliant - meaning that due to situational demands, they reluctantly accepted the false memory without objecting to it. On the other hand, participants who reported less than 10 details about the false event but believed that it had happened were classified as being accepting of the false event, while individuals who provided less than 10 details of the event and did not believe the event happened to them were considered to have no memory of the false event (p.
With the help of Katherine Ketcham, Dr. Elizabeth Loftus wrote Witness for the Defense: The Accused, the Eyewitness, and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial to speak out for all of the victims of false accusations in the justice system making readers think twice before putting someone in jail for life. It puts the injustices of memory into perspective. Loftus is an expert witness in court cases where there is no sufficient evidence against the convict other than that of eyewitness testimony. She speaks to the falsities of memory as a psychology expert. This advocate has worked for the defense of convicts from Ted Bundy to lesser known mistakes such as Howard Haupt.
The novel Witness for the Defense: The Accused, the Eyewitness, and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial goes into great detail about the encounters an expert witness, on memory especially, might come across by telling true stories from Dr. Elizabeth Loftus’s experiences with the help of Katherine Ketcham. It also provides information about Loftus’s work and research on memory and its limitations and malleability (Loftus & Ketcham, 1991). Applying research on memory to this novel allows one to better understand the implications of the prosecutor’s case more effectively. The first story told in Witness for the Defense is the one involving Steve Titus.
Memory is not reliable; memory can be altered and adjusted. Memory is stored in the brain just like files stored in a cabinet, you store it, save it and then later on retrieve and sometimes even alter and return it. In doing so that changes the original data that was first stored. Over time memory fades and becomes distorted, trauma and other events in life can cause the way we store memory to become faulty. So when focusing on eyewitnesses, sometimes our memory will not relay correct information due to different cues, questioning, and trauma and so forth, which makes eyewitness even harder to rely on. Yet it is still applied in the criminal justice system.
Law And Human Behavior, 35(6), 452-465. doi:10.1007/s10979-010-9257-x. Persistent link to this record : http://search.ebscohost.com.unh-proxy01.newhaven.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pdh&AN=2011-19356-003&site=ehost-live&scope=site Newring, K. B., & O'Donohue, W. (2008). False confessions and influenced witnesses. Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 4(1), 81-107. Persistent link to this record.
Those who are in favor of retrieved memories state that these memories can be repressed and remain unattainable for years until an individual seeks therapy, where these memories can often be uncovered and trauma related to them can be treated (Freyd, 1994). On the other hand, some individuals have expressed concerns with the concept of repressed memories since, according to them, there is little scientific evidence that can support the theory (Patihis, Ho, Tingen, Lilienfeld & Loftus, 2014). In other words, cases where individuals experience traumatic events but often lack memories of these, often do not provide sufficient reliable evidence to make credible arguments. Memory research offers further insight into the controversial topic of “memory wars” by explaining if the notion of repressing memories and placing them into the unconscious is a feasible hypothesis. Furthermore, research presented in this brief will discuss the reliability and usefulness of using recovered memories as evidence in a court cases. Due to the controversial nature of recovered memories in judicial courts and scientific communities, it is important to consider research in the area to determine truthfulness in allegations involving recovered memories, as these have previously posed
Memory plays a large role in our legal system. A person who witnesses a crime has to rely on recalling information, which isn’t always completely accurate. In Johnson (1993) paper she discusses ways memory interferes with the legal systems and what rules and regulations help prevent memory failure to interfere.
False memories being created is obvious through many different ways, such as eye-witness testimonies and past experiments that were conducted, however repression is an issue that has many baffled. There seems to be little evidence on the factual basis of repressed memories, and many argue that it does not exist. The evidence for repression in laboratories is slowly emerging, but not as rapidly as the evidence for false memories. It has been hard to clinically experiment with repressed memories because most memories are unable to be examined during the actual event to corroborate stories. Experimenters are discovering new ways to eliminate this barrier by creating memories within the experiment’s initial phase. This is important for examining the creation of false memories during the study phase. This research study will explore the differences between recovered memories and false memories through research and experiments. Other terms and closely related terms will be discussed, while examining any differences, in relation to repressed memories. The possibility of decoding an actual difference between recovered memories and false memories, through biological techniques. Because false memories can be created, examining these creations in a laboratory setting can shed light on facts overlooked. Exploring these issues will also help with the development of better therapeutic techniques for therapists in dealing with memories. This can lead to an easier process for patients and therapists if they must go through the legal system in relation to an uncovered memory.
In the field of cognitive neuroscience a memory study usually involves a combination of behavioral tasks and a machine that permits t...
Have you ever been an eyewitness at the scene of a crime? If you were, do you think that you would be able to accurately describe, in precise detail, everything that happened and remember distinct features of the suspect? Many people believe that yes they would be able to remember anything from the events that would happen and the different features of the suspect. Some people, in fact, are so sure of themselves after witnessing an event such as this that they are able to testify that what they think they saw was indeed what they saw. However, using an eyewitness as a source of evidence can be risky and is rarely 100% accurate. This can be proven by the theory of the possibility of false memory formation and the question of whether or not a memory can lie.
Kowalski, M.(1998, December). Applying the "two schools of thought" doctrine to the repressed memory controversy. The Journal of Legal Medicine. Retrieved September 14, 2000 from Lexis-Nexis database (Academic Universe) on the World Wide Web: http://www.lexis-nexis.com/universe
Memory is one of the most critical parts of cognition. It is important because it is involved in almost every aspect of cognition including problem solving, decision making, attention, and perception. Because of this importance, people rely on one’s memory to make important decisions. The value of one’s memory in this society is so high that it is used as evidence to either save one’s life or kill one’s life during murder trials. But as many of the cognitive psychologists know, human’s memory can cause many errors. One of these errors is false memory which is either remembering events that never happened or remembering events differently from the actual event. This finding of false memory raised big interests among psychologists and general public and many researches were done in order to find more about the false memory. The constructive approach to memory, which states that memory is constructed by person based on what really happened in addition to person’s other knowledge, experiences, and expectations, supports the idea of false memory. Just like what constructive approach to memory states, the false memory can be created by person’s knowledge, common biases, and suggestions. The present study was done in order to demonstrate one methodology that biases people to create and recall false memories. The present study is based on Deese’s experiment in 1959 and also on Roediger and McDermott’s experiment in 1995. The participants will be presented with sequence of words visually, and then they would have to classify a set of words as either in the sequence or not in the sequence. Our hypothesis is that people will create false memories and recall distractor words that are related to the sequence of words presented significantly m...
The mistaken recollection of information or the recollection of an event that never happened is known as a false memory (Rajagopal & Montgomery, 2011). The study of false memories has been of interest to cognitive psychologists (Otagaar, Smeets & Scoboria, 2013) for many years as it implies that human memory is vulnerable to the influence of external information, it also implies that our ability to recall events may not always be accurate. One major issue that has arisen with the research on false memories is the argued validity of eyewitness testimony (Wade, Green & Nash, 2011). Eyewitness testimony is the verified report made by someone who witnessed a crime (Wade et.al., 2011). False memories can interfere with the correct recollection of criminal offences which can potentially result in inaccurate accusations of a crime (Wade et.al., 2011). Researchers have been interested in studying false memories to develop a better understanding of how false memories work, and to what extent our memories can be assumed accurate (Jou & Flores, 2013).
The recognition accuracy for old events was calculated as the proportion of performed and imagined events that were correctly recognized as old, regardless of whether they were correctly attributed to having been performed or imagined. (Kelley, 2009). Even with a 1-week delay, the percentage of performed actions or imagined performing in phase 1 that were correctly remembered as old was relatively high 91.1%, and overall false alarm rates were relatively low at 4.7%. (Kelley, 2009). However people remembered that an event happened does not mean they correctly remembered how it happened. (Kelley, 2009). Source accuracy was somewhat impaired, though well above chance with the average performance of 88.8% and did not differ significantly between performed actions (M=88.7%) and imagined actions (M=89.0%). (Kelley, 2009).
From a legal standpoint, eyewitness memories are not accurate. Though they all illustrate the same concept, each paper described different ways eyewitness memories were altered. One’s memory can be misleading by their own attributions towards the situation, what they choose to see and not see, and if the individual has been through a single event or repetitive stressful events. As human beings, our memories on all matters are not concrete. When retelling stories, we tend to modify the situation and tailor certain events, making the information provided unreliable. An eyewitness testimony changes the track of a trial and information that is given to the court can be ambiguous and can cause bias towards the circumstances. Eyewitnesses can even be confident in their retelling of a situation and explain a complete event, when in fact, that particular event never
How Reliable Are Our Memories In Recalling How Things Really Happened? Memories are bridges between present and the events happened in the past. They are kept in the human brain. Do you believe that they are really fixed in there? Many people think that a memory is always available and unchangeable.