Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For the 12 mark question in May 2014 "Outline and evaluate one or more research studies which have investigated the accuracy of eyewitness testimony" would outlining and evaluating Loftus and Palmer (1974) study alone be enough? Or would I have to include information on age or anxiety as well?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amberuniverse)
    For the 12 mark question in May 2014 "Outline and evaluate one or more research studies which have investigated the accuracy of eyewitness testimony" would outlining and evaluating Loftus and Palmer (1974) study alone be enough? Or would I have to include information on age or anxiety as well?
    That will be enough: 6 marks for outlining the procedure of both of Loftus and Palmer's studies and then 6 marks evaluating it, where you can use other research on misleading information and also strengths and weaknesses of the study such as reliability and validity.

    This is a good question because you can talk about age, anxiety and misleading information if you wanted to. However, I think this was asked last year or the year before that so it's unlikely to come up again. Maybe as a 4/5 marker perhaps.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    3 weeks to go no where near ready! So much information to learn and I'm really not sure I've given myself enough time...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    dont worry im the exact same cant believe how quickly it's going
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    What Predictions are there for the 12 markers on both unit 1 and unit 2
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In our school we started with unit 2 and then went onto unit 1 so finishing unit 1 now and I totally can't remember unit 2! Panicking now because I didn't realise how much there was to learn and don't think I'll know it all in time :/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wabbit998)
    What Predictions are there for the 12 markers on both unit 1 and unit 2
    They are on this site: http://www.loopa.co.uk/blog/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone give me some valid evaluation points for these studies? It's a 12 marker on how age affects EWT. I understand that it's pretty long.

    Eyewitness testimony refers to the account a bystander gives in the courtroom, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation. Ideally this recollection of events is detailed.

    To begin with children, Poole and Lindsay studied some children aged 3-8 yrs old and showed them a science demonstration which was then followed by their parents reading the children a story which contained some information taken from the science demonstration as well as extra, novel material. Once questioned about the demonstration, results found that the children incorporated much of the new information (i.e. the parent’s story) into the original memory. In a later phase of the experiment, the children were asked to think very carefully about where they had got their information from (source monitoring). The older children could mostly do this successfully but the children in the younger age group were less able to distinguish the source of the information. Poole and Lindsay therefore concluded that since young children are poor at ‘source recognition’ they are unlikely to make for good eye witnesses. This implies that young children decrease the accuracy of an eye witness testimony.

    In terms of a range of age groups, another study which investigated the effect of age on EWT comes from Anastasi and Rhodes (2006). They used 3 different age groups ranging from 18-25, 35-45 and 55-78 yrs old. All participants were shown 24 photographs representative of the three different age groups and were asked to rate them for attractiveness as a ‘filler’ activity. After this, they were shown 48 photographs in which 24 were the originals, plus an additional new set of 24 pictures and asked which ones they recognised from the prior exercise. Results found young and middle-aged participants were significantly more accurate than their older counterparts. However, of most interest was the fact that all age groups were most accurate when identifying pictures from their own age group. This fits in with “The differential Experience Hypothesis” which suggests we are more able to recognise people of our own age or of similar ethnic group than different ones. Similarly the lack of experience with other age groups would result in a greater own-age bias. The Perceptual learning hypothesis would explain this due to individuals having different levels of experience between people who they were not regularly exposed to, such as people of different ages or any other diversity issue. Regular contact with their own age group would make them more expert at recognising them yet lacking experience in other differences hence poorer recall.

    Lastly, in regards to adults, Yarmey (1993) carried out an experiment where over 600 adults were stopped in the street, spoken to by a woman for 15 seconds. Two minutes later, they were stopped and asked to describe the appearance of a woman that they spoke to. There were no significant differences in the accuracy of recall between younger and older people; however, the younger participants appeared more confident in their responses. This could suggest a practical application(can this be turned into an elaborated a02 point?) in that younger people have the potential to be more reliable as they were more confident.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captivated)
    Can someone give me some valid evaluation points for these studies? It's a 12 marker on how age affects EWT. I understand that it's pretty long.

    Eyewitness testimony refers to the account a bystander gives in the courtroom, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation. Ideally this recollection of events is detailed.

    To begin with children, Poole and Lindsay studied some children aged 3-8 yrs old and showed them a science demonstration which was then followed by their parents reading the children a story which contained some information taken from the science demonstration as well as extra, novel material. Once questioned about the demonstration, results found that the children incorporated much of the new information (i.e. the parent’s story) into the original memory. In a later phase of the experiment, the children were asked to think very carefully about where they had got their information from (source monitoring). The older children could mostly do this successfully but the children in the younger age group were less able to distinguish the source of the information. Poole and Lindsay therefore concluded that since young children are poor at ‘source recognition’ they are unlikely to make for good eye witnesses. This implies that young children decrease the accuracy of an eye witness testimony.

    In terms of a range of age groups, another study which investigated the effect of age on EWT comes from Anastasi and Rhodes (2006). They used 3 different age groups ranging from 18-25, 35-45 and 55-78 yrs old. All participants were shown 24 photographs representative of the three different age groups and were asked to rate them for attractiveness as a ‘filler’ activity. After this, they were shown 48 photographs in which 24 were the originals, plus an additional new set of 24 pictures and asked which ones they recognised from the prior exercise. Results found young and middle-aged participants were significantly more accurate than their older counterparts. However, of most interest was the fact that all age groups were most accurate when identifying pictures from their own age group. This fits in with “The differential Experience Hypothesis” which suggests we are more able to recognise people of our own age or of similar ethnic group than different ones. Similarly the lack of experience with other age groups would result in a greater own-age bias. The Perceptual learning hypothesis would explain this due to individuals having different levels of experience between people who they were not regularly exposed to, such as people of different ages or any other diversity issue. Regular contact with their own age group would make them more expert at recognising them yet lacking experience in other differences hence poorer recall.

    Lastly, in regards to adults, Yarmey (1993) carried out an experiment where over 600 adults were stopped in the street, spoken to by a woman for 15 seconds. Two minutes later, they were stopped and asked to describe the appearance of a woman that they spoke to. There were no significant differences in the accuracy of recall between younger and older people; however, the younger participants appeared more confident in their responses. This could suggest a practical application(can this be turned into an elaborated a02 point?) in that younger people have the potential to be more reliable as they were more confident.
    AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If we get a 12 marker on privation or institutionalisation, can we use Rutter AND Hodges & Tizard as AO1 for both? Like would they both apply to JUST privation or JUST institutionalisation???
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    abnormality 12 marker is a BIG NO from me tbh...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone think the cognitive interview technique has enough material that could make it come up as a 12 marker?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dw1996)
    If we get a 12 marker on privation or institutionalisation, can we use Rutter AND Hodges & Tizard as AO1 for both? Like would they both apply to JUST privation or JUST institutionalisation???
    If you get one on privation, then you can use Hodges and Tizard, Genie, The twins, Rutter etc.

    However if you get one on just institutionalisation you cannot use Genie or the twins. You can only use Hodges and Tizard and Rutter (and any other studies which are based on institutional care).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Isabella~)
    What resources is everyone using? Will the textbook on it's own be fine?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have been using a mixture of class notes and the complete companion text book to make sure i cover everything , i'm sure a text book will be a good enough resource though , how is everyone revising ?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Do you need to know about Lorenz and Harlow's monkeys? It's in my textbook but we haven't been over them in lesson
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amberuniverse)
    Do you need to know about Lorenz and Harlow's monkeys? It's in my textbook but we haven't been over them in lesson
    Yes, you do need to know about them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by geeee11)
    If you get one on privation, then you can use Hodges and Tizard, Genie, The twins, Rutter etc.

    However if you get one on just institutionalisation you cannot use Genie or the twins. You can only use Hodges and Tizard and Rutter (and any other studies which are based on institutional care).
    Okay thank you
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I hope the 12 mark question is included in the Cognitive section
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys,
    I've just been revising attachment and just went over Schaffer and Emerson's study and was just wondering if the exam is ever likely to ask about that study in detail, or if you just need to know it as supporting or conflicting evidence do other studies? Thanks
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2cool4scool)
    Hi guys,
    I've just been revising attachment and just went over Schaffer and Emerson's study and was just wondering if the exam is ever likely to ask about that study in detail, or if you just need to know it as supporting or conflicting evidence do other studies? Thanks
    I don't think so, we just use to support Bowlby's theory of attachment and refute learning theory.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.