Question

According to the article, why is it that once witnesses state information as a fact or identify a person as the perpetrator, the witnesses are usually unwilling or unable to change their understanding of the situation, even after they are provided proof that their account is inaccurate? based on what you learned in the article, explain why jurors should consider eyewitness testimonies carefully during a trial. (site 2)

Answer 1

Several studies have been conducted on human memory and on subjects' propensity to remember erroneously events and details that did not occur. Elizabeth Loftus performed experiments in the mid-seventies demonstrating the effect of a third party's introducing false facts into memory.4 Subjects were shown a slide of a car at an intersection with either a yield sign or a stop sign. Experimenters asked participants questions, falsely introducing the term "stop sign" into the question instead of referring to the yield sign participants had actually seen. Similarly, experimenters falsely substituted the term "yield sign" in questions directed to participants who had actually seen the stop sign slide. The results indicated that subjects remembered seeing the false image. In the initial part of the experiment, subjects also viewed a slide showing a car accident. Some subjects were later asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "hit" each other, others were asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "smashed" into each other. Those subjects questioned using the word "smashed" were more likely to report having seen broken glass in the original slide. The introduction of false cues altered participants' memories.

Answer 2

they are not ready to change their mind or ready to accept the fault even an evidence is shown. inclusion of wrong clue will alter their perception and made them as fake eye witness. so the jurors should consider eyewitness testimonies carefully during a trial.