Eyewitness testimony and the misinformation effectBased on the feedback you received on your submission from last week, submit a revised draft of your paper with this additional information:Five addit

• Eyewitness testimony and the misinformation effect

Based on the feedback you received on your submission from last week, submit a revised draft of your paper with this additional information:

1. Five additional references that could be used for your research paper and include a 1-2 sentence description for each of the five additional references, explaining how they fit with the research topic and the research question proposed. Make sure that these references come from scholarly sources using Argosy’s library resources.
2. A  very detailed outline of what you would like to cover in the intro/lit review of your paper. Write it as an outline and think about what you want each paragraph or section to cover. Paste your references into each section where the information from that article applies to the topic. Below is an example of the outline although the references have not been pasted in yet:
   1. Introduction or Statement of the Problem (e.g. Predictors of Depression in Men)
      1. Research question (E.g. What factors predict depression in men? For example, age, marital status, family history, stressors).
      2. Why is it important/implications  (E.g. xx% of men are depressed; less likely to seek treatment; if we can identify who is at risk, may be able to direct them to treatment sooner)
      3. Revised hypothesis based on feedback from the instructor
   2. Review of the Literature (the following is an example for above topic):
      1. Brief description of depression, symptoms, and any unique symptoms for men (Cite articles from which you will obtain this information).
      2. How widespread is it? Stats on depression in general but also stats on depression in men (Cite articles from which you will obtain this information).
      3. List factors that put men at risk for depression (Cite articles).
         1. Difficulty communicating distress or sadness (Cite articles).
         2. Job/work pressures (Cite articles).
      4. Demographic characteristics (Cite articles).
         1. Relationship between age and depression (Cite articles).
         2. Relationship between marital status and depression (Cite articles).
3. A 1-2 page description of the sample you would like to use for your study, that provides the answer to the following questions:
   1. What sampling technique would you use?
   2. Does the sample generalize to the population? Explain why or why not.
   3. What inclusion criteria would be used? What exclusion criteria would be used, if any?
   4. What ethical issues might be encountered when collecting your information from this sample?
4. Be sure to also submit all your ten references (the five from last week and the five new ones you added) in an APA-style reference page. Be sure to also include an APA-style title page with your submission. Your paper should be at least 2-3 pages long. Make sure you write in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrate ethical scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; display accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.

Submit your assignment to the Submissions Area by the due date assigned. All written assignments and responses should follow APA rules for attributing sources.

This is for the assignment I handed in from my last assignment and it needs to be taken of what was written but reivsed llike it says above. 

This paper explores five articles that were published online all of which analyze the significance of eyewitness testimonies and the misinformation effect that may arise.An eyewitness is a person that sees some act, thing or occurrence and gives a first-hand account on it. Eyewitnesses are so highly regarded as they are largely believed to be sure of what they saw and in most cases regarded as those who are telling the truth above other people. Given that eyewitnesses are, as a matter of fact, at the scene of an occurrence, they observe everything that happens. However, too much information, which the eyewitnesses gather after the occurrence makes them biased that they only remember episodic events. The misinformation turns some eyewitnesses into perpetrators of myths and incorrect information which is then fit to an-easy-to-believe theory. This paper explores the usefulness of eyewitnesses and the effect of misinformation that comes later along with some theories developed to try and explain the events. It further looks into how one can alienate the truth from false theories after an occurrence, especially a tragic one. Abstrac

Eye Witnesses and Misinformation Effect

This paper analyzes how misinformation of eyewitnesses, wording of interview questions, post warning of witnesses, manipulation of memories by speakers and misleading children by using inappropriate non-verbal cues influences the memories of a witness. It further analyzes the methodologies applied and their limitations.

Literature Review

            In Vaitl et al.‘s (2017) summary article focuses on a test was conducted on seventy five participants with a fully-randomized video with nine randomized details. The participants were left for ten minutes after which they were given a narrative text which had six fake details in the sense that only three original details were in the text as in the video. The three retained details cued memories that were however affected by the misleading details in the text narrative. The levels of confidence were assessed. The participants were convinced that they were giving the right information.

            In Higham et al.’s (2017)  the article focuses on the effects of post warnings on the testimonies given by eyewitnesses. This article looks into the extent of the specificity of the details that the eyewitnesses are exposed to. A higher distortion is observed when misleading details are given to a larger extent than the little distortion in a case of less extent of misleading details in the post warning.

            In Loftus E. (2017) the major proponents of human memory are the details that one is given in a speech. The presentation, (emotion, non-verbal cues) of a speech determine the details that the audience will remember based on the varied emphasis on different aspects of the speech by a speaker. The argument is that misleading information given by a speaker may to some extent distort the memories of some listeners.

In Dodimead et al.’s (2015) a study on how children memories is influenced by the interviewer’s gestures is evaluated. The children were, in a test, made to watch a video after which they were interrogated. Misleading gestures by the interviewer led the children to giving distorted information by using the wrong non-verbal cues. An interviewer would for example ask a child about the dressing of a particular character in the video and simultaneously perform a gestute (of a hat for example) and the children ended up giving wrong information.

In Hickman G. (2017) the article evaluates how wording of questions influences the answers given by an eyewitness. The study was carried out on youths with an average age of 19.2 years. In a video involving a car accident for example, the words “the cars smashed” and “the cars came into with each other” led to different responses on the same video. The wording of interview triggers false memories at times