PROCEDURE AIM

Researchers contacted eyewitnesses four months

The study aimed to
post-event.
13 eyewitnesses participated in the study. investigate whether leading
Two groups were formed:
questions would affect the
One group was asked if they saw a broken
memory of eyewitnesses at
headlight on the getaway car.
The other group was asked if they saw a yellow
memory is reliable a real crime scene. (thief
panel on the car (the panel was blue).
shot the owner twice. Police
Eyewitnesses rated stress on a seven-point scale.
Biases: Leading questions and potentially
RECONSTRUCTIVE had been called and there
biased information may affect testimonies.
MEMORY was gunfire)

FINDINGS
It was found that eyewitnesses were
very reliable. They recalled a large
amount of accurate detail that could
be confirmed by the original police
reports. They also did not make errors
as a result of the leading questions
and those who were most distressed
by the situation had the most
accurate memories.
+ AND -
Strengths:
Field study with high ecological validity.
Eyewitnesses had firsthand emotional
responses to a real crime.
Archival evidence (police records)
confirmed testimonies.
Limitations:
Not replicable or generalizable due to
being a one-off incident.
Lack of control over variables, uncertain
level of rehearsal by eyewitnesses.