Final answer:
The study by Loftus and Palmer demonstrated that eyewitnesses are highly susceptible to false recognition memories when exposed to leading questions, with participants often recalling non-existent details like broken glass. These findings underscore the flexibility and vulnerability of human memory, particularly with the impact of suggestive questioning.
Step-by-step explanation:
Susceptibility to False Recognition Memories
The original study regarding false recognition memories was conducted by cognitive psychologist Elizabeth Loftus and her colleague John Palmer in 1974. The research focused on how the phrasing of a question could influence an eyewitness's memory of an event, a phenomenon known as the misinformation effect. Participants viewed videos of car accidents and were asked to estimate the vehicular speed based on various verbs used in the question, e.g., 'smashed' versus 'contacted'. Those who received the 'smashed' prompt were more likely to report higher speeds and were even twice as likely to falsely remember seeing non-existent broken glass at the accident scene one week later.
These findings demonstrate that eyewitness memories are not static but can be easily manipulated by leading questions, which can create a powerful suggestion influencing memory recall. Such suggestions can result not only in altered details but in the formation of entirely false memories about events that never occurred.
The significance of this research lies in its application to law enforcement and legal contexts, where the accuracy of eyewitness testimony can be crucial. It also raises important questions about the validity of recovered memories, especially those of traumatic nature, and provides essential insights into cognitive processes surrounding memory formation and reconstruction.