2.1.Discuss how cognitive research has influenced practice in an area of applied psychology, for example, eyewitness testimony, visual illusions, learning to read or any other relevant application

This guide will help you answer 2.1.Discuss how cognitive research has influenced practice in an area of applied psychology, for example, eyewitness testimony, visual illusions, learning to read or any other relevant application.

Cognitive psychology looks at how people think, remember, perceive and make decisions. It focuses on mental processes like memory, attention, and problem-solving. Research in this field has shaped many areas of applied psychology. One of the best-known applications is in the legal system, particularly in how eyewitness evidence is treated.

Eyewitness testimony was once seen as highly reliable. People believed that if someone saw an event, their memory of it would be accurate. Cognitive research has shown that this is not always the case. Studies have revealed that human memory can be flawed and influenced by many factors. This has changed how police and courts treat eyewitness accounts.

The Nature of Memory

Memory is not like a video recorder. In cognitive psychology, memory is understood as reconstructive. This means that when we remember something, we rebuild the memory using stored information and new inputs. Gaps can be filled in without us realising. This can lead to inaccurate recall.

For example, we may confuse the source of a memory. A person might remember seeing a suspect’s face from a news report rather than the actual crime. This is called source misattribution. Cognitive research has shown that such errors can happen without any intent to deceive.

Influential Research – Loftus and Palmer

A key study in this area is by Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer (1974). They showed people film clips of car accidents. Afterwards, they asked questions with different wording. Some were asked, “How fast were the cars going when they hit each other?” Others heard the word “smashed” instead of “hit”.

The wording influenced the speed estimates. People who heard “smashed” gave higher speed estimates. They were also more likely to later remember seeing broken glass, even though there was none. This showed that memory can be influenced by the way questions are asked.

Misleading Information and Post-Event Discussion

Cognitive researchers have found that misleading information can become part of someone’s memory. If a witness talks to another witness, their accounts may influence each other. This is called post-event discussion.

The study by Gabbert, Memon, and Allan (2003) investigated this. Participants watched different videos of the same crime from different angles. This meant each person saw details the other did not. After discussing with each other, over 70% of people included incorrect details they could not have seen themselves.

Weapon Focus Effect

Another finding from cognitive research is the weapon focus effect. When a weapon is present during a crime, people tend to focus on it. This means they pay less attention to other details, like the perpetrator’s face or clothing. Loftus, Loftus, and Messo (1987) showed that people who saw a scene with a gun were less accurate in identifying the suspect than those who saw a scene with a cheque book.

This finding has helped police understand why some witness descriptions are incomplete or wrong. It highlights the effect of attention on memory encoding.

Changes to Police Procedures – The Cognitive Interview

Cognitive research has led to the creation of new interviewing techniques. One of the most important is the Cognitive Interview (CI). Developed by Geiselman, Fisher, and colleagues in the 1980s, the CI uses principles from cognitive psychology to help witnesses recall more accurate information.

The CI includes methods such as:

• Context reinstatement – asking the witness to mentally put themselves back at the scene, recalling sights, sounds, and feelings.
• Report everything – encouraging the witness to recall all details, even if they seem unimportant.
• Change the order – asking the witness to recall events in a different order to reduce the use of assumptions.
• Change perspective – asking the witness to recall events as if from another viewpoint.

Research shows the CI can help improve recall without increasing false memories.

Video Identification and Line-ups

Cognitive research into eyewitness recognition has changed identification procedures. Live line-ups have been replaced in many cases by video identification parades. This helps control for bias and allows suspects’ images to be shown one at a time. It reduces pressure on witnesses and lowers the risk of them making an incorrect identification due to feeling they must pick someone.

Limitations of Eyewitness Testimony

Cognitive psychology has shown several limits of eyewitness evidence:

• Stress can impair recall. High-stress events often produce less accurate memories.
• Leading questions distort memory.
• Time gaps cause forgetting and reconstruction errors.
• Stereotypes and prior knowledge can influence what is remembered.

These findings have reduced the reliance on eyewitness testimony as sole evidence for conviction.

Expert Witnesses and Court Practice

Because of cognitive research, expert witnesses in psychology sometimes give evidence in court. They explain to juries the known problems with memory. Their role is to help jurors interpret eyewitness testimony in context.

Judges may also give warnings to juries. In some cases, juries are told they should not convict based on eyewitness testimony alone unless other strong evidence supports it.

Wider Applications – Training Police and Legal Staff

The awareness from cognitive research has led to training for police officers and legal professionals. Officers learn to avoid leading questions. They are taught not to share details about a case between witnesses. They practise using open-ended questions to elicit better recall.

Legal training includes understanding the role of suggestion, stress, and bias in shaping memory. This reduces the risk of wrongful conviction.

Children as Witnesses

Cognitive psychologists have also studied the memory of children. Research shows children can be more suggestible than adults. They may change their answers if repeatedly questioned. This has led to special procedures for interviewing children, such as using Achieving Best Evidence guidelines. These guidelines stress non-leading questions and careful recording of interviews.

The Role of False Memory Research

Loftus and Pickrell (1995) studied false memories by planting a fictional event into participants’ childhood memories. About a quarter of people came to believe they had been lost in a shopping centre as a child. This was entirely false. Such research has shown that even vivid memories are not always true. This understanding has made courts more cautious with recovered memories in abuse cases.

Technology and Recording Interviews

Cognitive research supports recording all witness interviews. This preserves the exact wording of questions and answers. Video and audio recordings help check whether leading questions were used. They also prevent later changes to the witness’s account.

Impact on Appeals and Wrongful Convictions

Misidentification has led to wrongful convictions in the past. In some cases, appeals have succeeded after DNA or other evidence proved innocence. The legal system now treats eyewitness evidence with greater caution. This change comes directly from cognitive research findings.

Criticisms of the Research

Some critics say that lab studies into eyewitness memory may lack ecological validity. This means they may not fully reflect real-life crimes, where emotional impact is higher. Yet field studies and real case analyses often support the same conclusions. This gives confidence in applying cognitive research to practice.

Ethical Issues in Research

Studying eyewitness memory often means showing participants distressing images. Researchers work under ethical guidelines. They use staged events or film clips rather than real violent scenes when possible. They also give participants debriefings, explaining the purpose of the study and correcting any false information given during the research.

Positive Outcomes from the Research

The changes inspired by cognitive psychology mean:

• Fairer line-up procedures
• Better interview quality
• Greater public protection through reduced wrongful convictions
• Better support for vulnerable witnesses

These outcomes show how research can make a real difference in applied psychology.

Final Thoughts

Cognitive research has transformed how the legal system treats eyewitness testimony. It has shown that memory is not perfect and can be influenced. This does not mean all eyewitnesses are wrong, but it does mean the system must take care in how memory evidence is collected and used.

The changes driven by this research, from the cognitive interview to expert court advice, have helped create fairer trials. They remind us that psychology is not just theory. It affects real people, real decisions, and justice itself. By using the findings of cognitive psychology, the legal process can protect both the innocent and the public.