Open and closed questioning is incredibly important in obtaining information from witnesses. I focused a lot of energy on learning about these two types of questioning because they interested me. Open-ended questions are useful in interviews when you are trying to get a good grasp on what happened. These questions allow interviewees to elaborate on the information that they know and wish to share, while allowing the interviewer to get a firmer understanding of the subject. Closed questions, are the questions that interviewees know the answer to and can be definite in their answer. These questions start with words such as; “who”, “what”, “where”, “when”, and “why”. Closed questions are better at the start …show more content…
I found the two videos that we were supposed to watch very interesting. The “Memory” section of the “Eyewitness Testimony” video was extremely interesting because the students had such different recollections of the video of the man stealing the ladies bag. This section of the video made me more aware of how important correct information is when trying to determine what a suspect looks like. In this video, students seemed to all have different ideas of what the man looked like and very few students were close in their description. The interviewers in this video used open-ended questions, allowing for the students to elaborate on what they remembered. By using open-ended questions, the interviewer allowed for the students to describe all that they could remember without the pausing that comes with closed questions. I found the piece about “constructive memory” very interesting. Individuals will fill in information that they cannot remember when recalling events that have happened; however, this information can be inaccurate. I think that it is very important to ask the right questions at the right times. I personally believe that to acquire more accurate information, it is important to
In chapter 6 of Unfair, Adam Benforado addresses the issues regarding human being’s poor memory and our justice systems outrageous reliability on eye witness testimony. Benforado believes that our real memories are severely obstructed by the human brains limit in perception. Our brains are not able to recall every moment of every day because there is simply no way to process everything we encounter in a day. Although most science supports the idea that our memories are unreliable and biased, most of us humans believe we have good and accurate memory. We also expect other to be able to perform basic memory task with accuracy and consistency, which is why for years, the United States so desperately depended on eye witness testimony to get a conviction. This desperation over the years has left hundreds, possibility thousands of innocent citizens paying for a crime they did not commit. According to the reading, of the first 250 exonerations in the United States, 190 of them happen to have involved mistaken identification’s
Eye witness testimony can be a very important piece of evidence surrounding criminal cases but not always the most reliable. As discussed in the textbook Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases, jurors often rely very heavily on eyewitness interpretations of an incident to determine whether or not a defendant is guilty. Since an adult is presumed to be competent, a juror will often make the assumption that the testimony provided is an accurate account of the events that took place. Amongst other factors, the amount of stress the witness is under at the time of the crime, the presence of a weapon, lighting and the lack of any distinguishable characteristics can play a role in creating a false memory. Under that extreme pressure, a witness is more likely not to recall certain aspects of an incident. Their attention may have been drawn elsewhere and they never noticed the suspect’s beard, tattoos or facial features which can be crucial identifiers. The consequences of falsely identifying a suspect due to false memories can ruin an innocent person’s life, have them convicted and cause them to be punished for a crime that they did not commit.
What Psychological Research Has Told Us about the Accuracy of Eyewitness Testimony L and P = Loftus and Palmer Pps = Participants EWT = Eyewitness testimony Despite the considerable importance juror’s place on EWT, psychological research has shown that EWT tends to be unreliable. This unreliability can be explained in terms of the reconstructive nature of memory (schema theory).
121). Close-ended questions are usually asked as a first response to an emergency situation and are essential in dangerous situations (p. 121). Open-ended questions are advantageous when the interviewer wants to create a free flowing dialogue (p. 121). These questions are generally more effective than close-ended questions because they allow for more elaborate responses from the interviewee and they can direct the conversation however they wish (p. 121). Interviewers generally find it natural to ask close-ended questions, but they do not draw as much information from interviewees and often cut interviews short (p. 121).
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.
Eyewitness testimonies are also valued unique factors they can bring to criminal investigations. Nevertheless, an eyewitness testimony can also raise several factors that threaten its credibility, especially for those who haven’t had prior training in assessing witness reliability. It has been suggested, for instance, that jurors only have their common sense as their guides when their witnesses have strenuous claims (Schechel et al., 2006, p.178).
Valentine, T., & Maras, K. (2011). The effect of cross-examination on the accuracy of adult eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 554-561. doi: 10.1002/acp.1768
The interviewers, in the video, used open ended question with their clients. The way the interviewers worded the questions had their
Most interviews require strategic planning and relevant questions to be able to gather enough information. There were many things that the detective did great for example, in the first scene when the victim and the detective walked in, he immediately asked her to sit in a comfortable chair, got her a cup of coffee and asked her if she needed anything else. He quickly proceeded to explain what the interview is going to be about, removing any doubt or apprehension that she may experience during the interview. The detective began the interview with," Don't try to remember things you can't…if you need to stop anytime, just tell me." (Victim Interview,1998). Which essentially created a rapport between the detective and the victim. The detective began the interview with an open-ended question, asking the victim to tell him what happened from the start. While the victim was talking, he did not interrupt, but was rather patient with her, nodding and making eye contact continuously. During a one point of the video, the woman began crying, unable to hide her distress, to which the investigator reacted quickly responding "No pressure, I know you are upset... Are you alright to carry on?" (Victim Interview, 1998). In my opinion, this is a great technique to use when one is dealing with an elderly victim in distress. As the investigator carefully listened, he then recapped all the information back to the victim making sure it is correct. We see this throughout the whole film, where the detective continuously seeks victim's validation. Another thing that I found interesting is the way that the investigator used the cognitive approach on the victim, to stimulate her memory. He politely asked her to draw a sketch of the area that the crime happened at, then he proceeded to make her retell everything from the beginning but in the present tense. As she was struggling, he patiently guided her, by saying "Show me", "Describe to
Truth be told, eyewitnesses always play a crucial role in the judgment process. In the present justice system, the testimony from eyewitnesses could possibly be one of the most reliable evidences and influence jurors on judging corresponding perpetrator. In psychology, researchers use eyewitness memory instead of any other expressions.
Eyewitness testimony is defined as, “an area of research that investigates the accuracy of memory following an accident, crime, or other significant event, and the types of errors that are commonly made in such situations.” Much emphasis is placed on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony as often-inaccurate eyewitness testimony can have serious consequences leading to wrong convictions. Eyewitness testimony is a powerful tool within any field, particularly that of justice, as it is a readily accepted form of evidence that allows for convictions. However, Tests conducted by Loftus have shown an enormous swing from a non-guilty verdict, to guilty within the same case, simply through the introduction of an eyewitness. This alone displays the importance of eyewitness testimony, and accentuates the theory that jurors tend to over believe, or at least rely heavily on such accounts.
There were many things I learned from this film, but the number one thing that I learned is that knowledge is power. It was the men that knew the case and its background, which were able to encourage and persuade the others to take their side. And the same goes for our class, the person with the most knowledge of the situation or lesson, is going to get a better grade or have more people wanting to be on their team. They have the power to change the scene or persuade someone to see it their way.
Eyewitness testimony is especially vulnerable to error when the question is misleading or when there’s a difference in ethnicity. 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. For instance, a group of students saw the face of a young man with straight hair, then heard a description of the face supposedly written by another witness, one that wrongly mentioned light, curly hair. When they reconstructed the face using a kit of facial features, a third of their reconstructions contained the misleading detail, whereas only 5 percent contained it when curly hair was not mentioned (Page 359). This situation shows how misleading information from other sources can be profoundly altered.
...th those programs. During the interview question selecting is important. Open ended questions are good at establishing rapport and give the subject a chance to explain things in general. Closed ended questions are great at getting specific answers and details. When concluding an interview the investigator should have the subject restate everything that happened and make sure that nothing has been left out. At anytime in an interview or interrogation recognizing signs that a subject is getting closer to admitting something should be capitalized on, if not that information may never be obtained from the subject. Interrogations are slightly different from interviews but should be handled in a similar way. Showing the subject respect and treating them like a human bean is just as important in interrogations as it is in interview. Interview and interrogating is an art. It takes practice and work, but with the right techniques and experience and a positive attitude anyone can become successful at it.
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