Study Guides (390,000)
CA (150,000)
Western (10,000)
PSYCH (2,000)
Study Guide

[Psychology 2990A/B] - Final Exam Guide - Ultimate 75 pages long Study Guide!


Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSYCH 2990A/B
Professor
Doug Hazlewood
Study Guide
Final

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 75 pages of the document.
Western
Psychology 2990A/B
FINAL EXAM
STUDY GUIDE

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Chapter 1 Psychology and Law
- Thomas Sophonow was charged for killing a 16 year old Barbara in 1981. He had 3 trials. 1st there was a
hung jury (i.e jury members were unable to reach a verdict). Other 2 decided that he was guilty. 3rd trial
deliberations lasted for 5 days (the longest in the Canada’s history). After 4 years in prison he was set
free, but not declared innocent. In the end (just by 2003 year) Winipeg gov’t paid him 2.3$ million in
compensation and apologized.
The Canadian Justice System
Criminal & civil law
Civil cases plaintiff brings complaint against a defendant for violating his rights
When a crime is committed and a person is arrested, crowns attorneys office decides whether there’s
enough evidence to press formal charges (at the preliminary hearings Judges decide whether there will
be a trial)
If there’s enough evidence for trial more evidence is gathered and there are negotiations which usually
result in plea of lesser charge
¼ of cases go to trial
First impressions of accused and witnesses have a powerful effect on police investigators and jurors
social psychological process
Attributions about what caused criminal behaviour are made and prejudiced/stereotypical beliefs affect
those attributions
Social cognition processes affect jurors decision making
Eyewitness Testimony
In Canada, the legal system assigns a great deal of significance to eyewitness testimony
If you are pointed out by an eyewitness you are most likely going to be convicted even if circumstantial
evidence says your innocent
Rewarding an eyewitness for testimony should make testimony somewhat suspicious (in case of
Sophonow some witnesses admitted that they were rewarded for the info)
Most common cause of innocent conviction occur as a result of eyewitnesses
Jurors believe eyewitnesses and overestimate accuracy of testimony
Rod Lindsay did an experiment at University of Alberta where a thief stole a calculator and had 3
different conditions, one where thief wore hat over his head and was there for only 12 seconds, one
where thief wore hat further up on head and was there longer and third where thief didn't where a hat
and was there for 20 seconds
o The results were as expected: more visual info on thief the better the chance of student correctly
identifying thief in photo
o Second stage a researcher acted as lawyer and questioned witness about their eyewitness
identifications on camera and then a new group of participants watched the videotapes and rated
how much they thought the witness had correctly identified the thief
Jurors overestimated accuracy of witness especially in the condition where the thief was
difficult to identify
Out of 40 cases where DNA evidence after the fact proved the innocence, 36 cases were guilty as a
result of eyewitness (5 of them were on death row)
Wrong eyewitness testimonies are responsible for more wrongful convictions than all other causes
combined
Eyewitness identification is a form of social perception it is subject to similar problems including
memory
To be an accurate witness 3 memory processing stages must be completed
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

1. Acquisition what people notice and perceive, people cannot perceive everything they only
acquire a subset of available info in environment (notice & pay attention to info in the
environment)
Sources of error:
o Poor viewing conditions (further distance-poorer accuracy)
o People see what they expect to see (alan wasn't expecting his elder neighbour to have
been strangled so he didn't notice the broken stuff all over which indicated a fight and as
a result thought she died of old age). Ppl are poor at noticing unexpected
o Stress- more stress worse memory
o Focus on weapons (and less of subjects features) also true for witnesses
o Own race bias (we are better at recognizing things we are familiar with because people
have more contact with their own race so they better learn how to distinguish one
individual from another)
Study of Koreans who grew up in France showed that they better remembered
white faces
we are best at remembering faces that are of the race with which
we have the most contact
When ppl examine same race faces, they pay attention to details, while in terms of
the other race they tend to stop on classifying as of a different race “that’s a
black face”
don’t pay attention to individual creatures
if we’ll pay attention
to individ info we are quite capable of discriminating b/w cross-race faces
o Change blindness light flicker and don’t notice subtle differences in image perception
or attention. (also distracts while driving) (?)
2. Storage what people store in memory what they have acquired from the environment
Sources of error:
o People can become confused about where they heard or saw something, memories in one
“album” can get confused with memories in another “album”
o Misleading questions (can alter the memories of the eyewitness)
o People are more likely to incorporate misinformation into their memories when the event
they have witnessed produces a negative emotion like a crime
o Source monitoring errors process where people try to identify the source of their
memories (e.g. if they saw a rust colour truck in video and then read in a misleading
question about a blue colour truck they now have 2 pieces of info in their memory and
may confuse where the two came from and could think they saw a blue truck and read a
rust color truck ppl become mixed up about where they heard or saw something)
Reconstructed Memory: the distortion of memories of an event by information
encountered after the event has occurred
info that we obtain after witnessing an event can change our memory if the event
(study with a car leading ? about the street sign 25% made a mistake.
Misleading ? can change ppl’s minds about the event)
- adults with intellectual disabilities may be especially vulnerable to being swayed by leading ?
3. Retrieval what people recall stored info at a later time
- If an eyewitness saw the suspect commit a crime ant then picked the suspect out of a
lineup, it’s a pretty good evidence the suspect is guilty jurors, police, judges are likely
to assume that the witness is right
- Lineups have a higher success rate than the showing of only 1 person (with 1 person its
4x higher risk of mistake, especially if worn the same clothes as a person who committed
crime)
- Witness often choose the person in a lineup who most resembles the criminal
Sources of error:
o “Best guess” problem in line-up identification
Steps to avoid “best guess” problem:
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version