2010.doc

Brainstorming Refers to a technique designed to improve group decisions by encouraging free exchange of ideas and the elimination of criticism Rules of brainstorming 1) more ideas generated the better 2) the more creative/ wilder the ideas better 3) should be able to express ideas with out concern for quality or others reaction to them 4) to not evaluate ppls ideas until all the solutions are on the table 5) if someone adds out a wild/creative idea( you can improve upon it, add to it 6) don?t be critical of others ideas claimed that group would generate twice as many ideas compared to when you were working on your own what does research say? When ppl have the same instructions as brainstorming group, and work by self( the individual comes up with more ideas Due to process loss Ppl still worry about others evaluations Applications (Chapter Twelve)?3 areas) 1) Social Psychology and the Legal System False confessions; Kassin et al. study 1) voluntary false confession when you confess out of your own free will, maybe to protect someone else 2) coerced compliant false confession when you privately maintain your innocence, but you confess due to pressure ex. Ppl threaten to use physical abuse on you unless you confess 3) coerced internalized false confession when ppl come to believe they actually committed crimes that they did not commit ppl maybe tricking you etc researcher most interested in this Kassin et al. study 2 hypothesis 1) if you present ppl w/ false evidence, it can lead ppl who are already uncertain to confess to an act they didn?t commit 2) the false confessors will internalize the confession and than confabulate it (create details in their memory that?s consistant with this new guilt) subjects 79 college students assigned to 4 conditions high or low plausibility presence or absence of a false incriminating witness task 2 ppl work on a computer task confederate read allowed a list of letters while the real subj typed them on computer expiermenter warned subj not to push alt key or computer will crash 1min into the task, computer crash, subj accused of hitting alt key each student asked if hit alt key dependent variable ? if confessed 3 opportunities to confess 1) signing a false confession 2) telling a confederate that he pressed the key (way of internalizing) they confess to another confed who walks in says they must have pushed the alt key 3)?recalling? false details of his supposed ?crime? description of plausibility variable 1) read letter very fast (more plausible cuz trying to keep up) 2) confed read letters at slow pace (less plausible) description of witness variable 1) confed says person hit alt key 2) confed didn?t see person hit key 69% of students signed false confession (overall no matter variable) 28% internalized their guilt 9% confabulated the ?remembered? false details when was false confession most likely? pres of witness and high plausibility= confess 100% complied for commiting crime 35% confabulated 65% internalized their guilt no gender differences how often might they occur in real world 1 review of 400 cases where innocent ppl convicted of murder 14% were caused by false confessions plausibility( person may have been high so pres of witness and high plausability Eyewitness testimony How accurate is eyewitness testimony? Our memorys are often reconstructive (we fill in the gaps) Loftus research Our reconstruction of passed events is heavly influenced by the way the questions are asked Ex. ?did you see a broken headlight?? vs. ?did you see the broken headlight? The= more likely to say yes when question asked Ex. How fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other? (collided, hit) Smashed= 41% Contacted 32%