We’ve all watched a courtroom TV scene where all eyes are on the testifying witness when they are dramatically asked by their attorney to identify who committed the crime and they angrily/ tearfully/ fearfully point to the defendant.  Never have I not wanted to be that person more than when I read chapter 8 of our textbook and learned eyewitness testimony to be unreliable under the best of circumstances.  Said to be strongly relied upon by jurors, scientists, psychologists and attorneys are aware of eyewitness testimony shortfalls.  Often these shortfalls are connected to how our brains are wired, not intentional misrepresentation by the witness.

Top-down processing helps us shape our perception and memory; this also makes our memory impressionable rather than fixed.  Our knowledge, bias, assumptions and prior experiences all help to build and shape the perception that our memory is based on.  Memory is aptly compared to over packed drawers in Witness For the Defense, “…our brains seem to enjoy ransacking the memory drawers, tossing the facts about, and then stuffing everything back in, oblivious to order or importance. As new bits and pieces of information are added into long-term memory, the old memories are removed, replaced, crumpled up, or shoved into corners.”  This is a colorful way of saying that our memories are not an exact replay of the original scene.  Memory is reshaped through the recall process.  Our recall pulls from our last recall where we may have modified details based on interpretation and additional input rather than the original impression.  This is done unconsciously so the confidence in our memory remains or even improves as the modified version becomes more familiar.

Memory and confidence are impacted by expectations, police interaction and events following the crime.  Our brain has a way of “filling in the gaps” when pieces are missing, we however, maintain the belief that our memories are factual.  When questioned, we may include items we expected to be at the scene and truly believe we saw them.  We can also be misguided by how questions are phrased, answering by including details from the question.  These details then become part of our memory and the more we retell the story the more confident we are in it.  When witnesses are shown a line up they assume the suspect is included so they select the person that most closely matches their memory.  They become more confident if they receive positive feedback that they did well and are often unable to neutrally revaluate back to the original incident.  Jurors trust the testimony of witnesses that express they are highly confident in what they are saying.

Not only is our perception and memory working against us, but our attention is often impacted by the stress of the situation in addition to any environmental issues (low lighting, distance, etc.).  If a weapon is present attention is more often focused there than on the distinguishing traits of the perpetrator.  It is also harder to identify suspect that do not have noticeable traits like scars or tattoos, descriptions become more generic because we interact with so many people do filter out many of the individual details.  Studies show that differences in race between the suspect and the witness increase identification difficulties too.

Contrary to common belief, memory is not permanent; it can be and is changeable, unknowingly and unintentionally.  Research shows that details become more inaccurate as time passes.  Unfortunately for jurors, eyewitnesses may want to help solve the crime, but our brains are not wired to recall detailed accounts, especially those encountered under extremely stressful conditions.

References

Goldstein, E. Bruce, (2011). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience (3^rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Engelhardt, L. (n.d.). The Problem with Eyewitness Testimony. Stanford Journal of Legal Studies. Retrieved from http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm

Arkowitz, H and Lilienfeld, S. (2009, January 8). Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/

Green, M. (n.d.). Errors in Eyewitness Identification Procedures. Marc Green Phd. Retrieved from http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/mistakenid.html

Loftus, Dr E and Ketcham, K. (1991). The Magic of the Mind. Witness For the Defense: The Accused, the Eyewitness, and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/dna/photos/eye/text_06.html

Generally speaking, the goal of studying is to learn and retain the information although sometimes it is remembering just long enough to make it through the exam.  In both cases we want to improve our encoding and retrieval of memory.  Techniques may vary based on the final goal; we’ll focus on learning for retention.  If you Google “tips for better studying”, you will find multiple top ten lists and suggestions, our textbook provides six: elaborate, organize, avoid illusion of learning, generate and test, match learning and testing conditions, and take breaks (Goldstein, 2011, p. 187).

Our textbook, like most, is organized to build on information covered in previous chapters.  When reading a chapter I connect previously learned terms, definitions and lessons in a way that “elaborates” or adds to what’s already been covered.  The new information becomes easier to remember and the known information more useful because I am able to relate the two in a meaningful way.  I have a diagram of the brain that I add new functions to as I progress through the chapters, it makes it easier for me to picture the building blocks.  The brain is more efficient at recalling information when it is grouped together, grouping notes about similar topics will help with the chunking process.  I also take notes as I read the chapter; this helps me focus on the task at hand.  I also try to rephrase my notes into my own words to help me process rather than reading through and completely miss the meaning.

The idea of the generate and test method is that encoding and retrieval is strengthened when we are actively engaged in learning.  Completing a class lab generates individually relatable data and answering the questions causes us to think through our results and connect them to what we have previously read.  Not only are we engaged, but the learning process results in episodic memory that also improves recall.  In my statistics class; I complete chapter and lab problems and practice quizzes.  This work highlights areas I understand and areas that need more attention.  This is a better study tool that just re-reading my notes because I’m interacting with the data rather than passively reading.  Both of these practices help avoid the illusion of learning, that is thinking you understand something, but really only processing it at a surface level.

One study tip PsychCentral provides is to “Bring everything you need, nothing you don’t” (Grohol, n.d.).  The idea is to find and equip your study area in a way that is conducive to studying and limits distractions.  In my workspace I have my books and laptop, but not a TV or my husband to chat with; it is becoming natural for me to focus on class work there.  According to encoding specificity we benefit from studying and testing in the same space, recall is improved when performed under the same settings as encoding.  This directly ties to the study concept of matching learning and testing conditions.  We, as online learners, may have a leg up here; we benefit from being about to read, study and take out exams in the same workspace.  When taking class in a traditional classroom you generally do not spend extended preparation and study time in that room.

The most beneficial study techniques may vary by person or subject.  It is important to determine what works best for you.  Now I am going to follow another suggestion to enhance memory… take a break.

References

Goldstein, E. Bruce, (2011). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience (3^rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Strauss, V. (2013, August 27). Study techniques that work- and (surprisingly) don’t. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/08/27/study-techniques-that-work-and-surprisingly-dont/

Grohol, J. (n.d.). 10 Highly Effective Study Habits. PsychCentral. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/lib/top-10-most-effective-study-habits/000599

Cherry, K. (n.d.). How to Become a More Effective Learner. About.com. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/educationalpsychology/tp/effective-learning.htm

(2011, May 25). 9 Awesome Study Tips For College Students. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/08/study-tips-for-college-_n_709096.html#s136089title=Alternate_Study_Spaces

Chantal. (2012, October 2). 10 Effective Study Tips to Help Improve Your Memory. The Campus Companion. Retrieved from http://www.thecampuscompanion.com/2012/10/02/10-study-tips-to-improve-your-memory/#.Uxt7xGeYZjp

One question in our reading really caught my attention, “How aware could you be of things that are happening right now, …if you had lost all of your senses and, therefore, your ability to perceive?” (Goldstein, 2011, p. 49).  I thought of this question again when reading about top-down processing, processing that draws on prior experiences and knowledge.  What if you were inexperienced with your senses and had no knowledge base to draw from?  That’s where mirror neurons come into play.  Mirror neurons fire when we perform an action, but also when we see someone perform an action, we experience the action like we performed it ourselves.  Maybe it’s because I’ve been invited to a first birthday party next week, but I thought about the impact of mirror neurons and child development.

Have you ever made faces with a baby?  An infant will stick out their tongue (within days of birth) or make a face copying the action made by a caregiver.  Mirror neurons make it possible to experience the action by watching others.  This creates the opportunity for the baby to imitate and learn the action, gaining experience in how to move their mouth and tongue and connect with the caregiver.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2YdkQ1G5QI

As with the motor skills of facial expression, mirror neurons are thought to influence language.  Babies mimic many sounds around them, laughing and talking, in an effort to communicate.  It seems that mirror neurons provide an opportunity for the baby to learn by copying and interacting with others.  With practice, babies will have babble conversations with you; they will even talk and then wait for you to respond.  As the child develops they will add inflection and tone to communicate even before knowing what words to use.  They have heard these traits and are mirroring them back with the expectation that you will understand and respond.

Mirror neurons can also influence emotional and social bonding.  It’s been said that humans are social creatures and tend to identify with and favor people that are similar to them.  Mirror neurons set us up to connect with others because we have the ability to process their actions as our own, we can feel what they are feeling.  I’m sure you’ve been in a situation where one baby begins to cry because another baby in the room is crying.  Or have seen a baby giggle because the people around them are laughing.  The baby doesn’t understand the joke, but at the neuron level they connecting with the action of others and experiencing the same emotion.

Experience-dependent plasticity indicates that the brain can be trained with each additional interaction.  So the more we interact with the environment the more we can learn or hone what we practice.  While additional research is needed on mirror neurons it is easy to picture the impact on child and lifelong development both cognitively and socially.  It’s a big world out there so it’s nice to think my brain is setup to assist in understanding and identifying with others. One last thought… if I yawned now would your mirror neurons fire and nudge you to also?

References

Goldstein, E. Bruce, (2011). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research, and Everyday Experience (3^rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Winerman, L. (2005). The mind’s mirror. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/oct05/mirror.aspx

Lacoboni, M. (n.d.). Mental Mirrors. Natural History. Retrieved from http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/features/28883/mental-mirrors

Matousek, M. (2011, March 28). I Feel Your Pain, But Why?. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ethical-wisdom/201103/i-feel-your-pain-why

Cort, J. (Writer and Producer). (2005, January 25). PBS. Mirror Neurons. Video retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/mirror-neurons.html

Prenoetic. (2008, November 2). Neonate imitation [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2YdkQ1G5QI

Mayo Clinic Staff. (2011, June 17). Infant Development: Milestones from 4 to 6 Months. Mayo Clinic. Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.org/infant-development/art-20048178