Unconscious Transference - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 19
About This Presentation
Title:

Unconscious Transference

Description:

Eyewitness Identification Seminar ... On the general acceptance of eyewitness testimony research. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416. Loftus, E. F. (1976). – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:416
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 20
Provided by: stud1357
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Unconscious Transference


1
Unconscious Transference
  • Dwight J. Peterson
  • Eyewitness Identification Seminar
  • University of Northern Iowa

2
Unconscious Transference
  • Definition
  • Identifying a innocent foil, who is familiar from
    some context, instead of the actual perpetrator
  • Different from identifying any old foil face from
    the lineup?
  • Unfortunately, yes, this phenomenon presents yet
    another problem with eyewitness IDs

3
Transference Effect
Joe
  • I see Joe steal a car
  • Police show up
  • I am the witness to the crime
  • Cops have no one in custody
  • I see Tom while flipping through a mugshot book
    at the police station
  • Later on, Im given the following lineup

Tom
4
Transference Effect
  • What happens if I pick number 4?
  • What happens if number 4 (Tom) has two priors for
    grand theft auto?

5
History
  • Glanville Williams (1955)
  • Coined the term
  • Houts (1956)
  • The sailor and the ticket agent
  • Elizabeth Loftus (1976)
  • Pioneer study of the UT effect
  • TA lineup 60 chose previously viewed
    bystander
  • Thompson (1988)
  • Rape victim confusion related to source of
    familiarity

6
Associated Problems
  • Mugshot books
  • Different context, but familiarity remains
  • Lineups after mugshots increased probability
    for misidentification
  • Innocent bystanders
  • Same context, retrieve and identify innocent face
    from lineup

7
Theories
  • Source monitoring errors
  • Distinguishing between memory sources
  • Automatic processing
  • Implicit Memory
  • Infer identity at encoding or retrieval
  • Conscious Inference
  • Read et al., (1990)

8
Source Monitoring
  • External
  • Based on sensory experience and subsequent
    perception
  • Internal
  • Based on thoughts, feelings
  • Easier to distinguish between one internal and
    one external memory
  • Reality Monitoring Harder to distinguish between
    two external (or two internal) memories
  • Lindsay Johnson (1989)

9
Automatic Processes
  • Remembering old non-famous names as famous
  • Jacoby, Kelly, Brown, Jasechko (1989)
  • Familiarity without recognition
  • Jacoby, Woloshyn, Kelley (1989)
  • Automatic processing of faces may lead to
    familiarity without conscious attention to
    features necessary for differentiation

10
Conscious Inference
  • Retrieval
  • Bystander does not come into play until the
    lineup is presented
  • Read et al., (1990)
  • Encoding
  • Ross et al., (1994)
  • Erroneously thinking the bystander is the
    assailant while encoding the crime, and later
    thinking they are one in the same

11
Differentiating Between Bystander and Perpetrator
  • One in the same?
  • TA-lineups increase transference
  • Lineups with BOTH the bystander and perpetrator
    cause a different type of trouble for
    transference participants
  • Awareness that the two are DIFFERENT decreases
    transference
  • Ross et al., (1994) (Experiment 2)
  • Phillips, Geiselman, Haghighi, Lin (1997)

12
Evidence for Unconscious Transference
  • Loftus (1976)
  • Read et al., (1990) Experiment 5
  • View conscious inference as occuring at retrieval
  • Ross et al., (1994) Experiments 1, 2, 3, 4
  • Evidence for conscious inference at encoding
  • Experiments 3 4 manipulated encoding
  • Found conscious inference was made soon after
    viewing the portion of video displaying the crime

13
Meta-analysis
  • Deffenbacher, Bornstein, Penrod (2006)
  • Mainly a review of problems with mugshots
  • Commitment effects
  • Retroactive Interference
  • Unconscious Transference
  • Effect size twice as large for studies looking at
    the mugshot exposure compared to studies looking
    at exposure to an innocent bystander

14
Memory and Mugshot Books
  • Commitment effects pose a problem
  • Dysart, Lindsay, Hammond, Dupuis (2001)
  • Found greater inaccuracy rates for commitment
    group (Experiment 2)
  • No difference between control conditions and
    transference conditions (Experiment 2)

15
Other Related Issues
  • Older participants
  • Higher misidentification rates for younger facial
    stimuli
  • More errors related to identity confusion for
    older participants
  • Perfect Harris (2003)
  • Other-race faces and context memory
  • More errors for which context (background) a face
    was observed for African American faces
  • Horry Wright (2008)

16
A Recent Theory
  • Unconscious transference as a type of change
    blindness?
  • Davis, Loftus, Vanous, Cucciare, (2008)
  • Illusions of continuity
  • Levin Simons (2000)
  • Continuous vs. Discontinuous Innocent
  • Misidentification rates higher for the CI

17
What do you think?
  • Is the evidence for unconscious transference
    compelling enough to attempt policy suggestions
    or even worthy of mention in court by expert
    witnesses?
  • Does talking about this phenomenon decrease the
    credibility of the expert witness?
  • What about Kassin, et als (2001) position on
    reliable evidence?

18
Thank You!
  • Any comments or constructive criticism you may
    have regarding this presentation would be greatly
    appreciated!

19
References
  • Davis, D., Loftus, E. F., Vanous, S., Cucciare,
    M. (2008). Unconscious transference can be an
    instance of change blindness. Applied Cognitive
    Psychology, 22, 605-623.
  • Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., Penrod,
    S. D. (2006). Mugshot exposure effects
    Retroactive interference, mugshot commitment,
    source confusion, and unconscious transference.
    Law and Human Behavior, 30, 287-307.
  • Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hammond, R.,
    Dupuis, P. (2001). Mugshot exposure prior to
    lineup identification Interference,
    transference, and commitment effects. Journal of
    Applied Psychology, 86, 1280-1284.
  • Geiselman, R. E., Haghighi, R., Stown, Ronna
    (1996). Unconscious transference and
    characteristics of accurate and inaccurate
    eyewitnesses. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 2,
    197-209.
  • Horry, R., Wright, D. B. (2008). I know your
    face but not where I saw you Context memory is
    impaired for other-race faces. Psychonomic
    Bulletin Review, 15, 610-614.
  • Kassin, S. M., Tubb, V. A., Hosch, H. M.,
    Memon, A. (2001). On the general acceptance of
    eyewitness testimony research. American
    Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
  • Loftus, E. F. (1976). Unconscious transference in
    eyewitness identification. Law and Psychology
    Review, 2, 93-98.
  • Perfect, T. J., Harris, L. J. (2003). Adult age
    differences in unconscious transference Source
    confusion or identity blending? Memory
    Cognition, 31, 570-580.
  • Phillips, M. R., Geiselman, R. E., Haghighi, D.,
    Lin, C. (1997). Some boundary conditions for
    bystander misidentifications. Criminal Justice
    and Behavior, 24, 370-390.
  • Read, D. J., Tollestrup, P., Hammersley, R.,
    McFadzen, E., et al. (1990). The unconscious
    transference effect Are innocent bystanders ever
    misidentified? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4,
    3-31.
  • Ross, D. F., Ceci, S. J., Dunning, D., Toglia,
    M. P. (1994). Unconscious transference and
    mistaken identity When a witness misidentifies a
    familiar but innocent person. Journal of Applied
    Psychology, 79, 918-930.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com