Learning, Memory And Perception Assignment Sample

  • 54000+ Project Delivered
  • 500+ Experts 24x7 Online Help
  • No AI Generated Content
- +
35% Off
£ 6.69
Estimated Cost
£ 4.35
8 Pages 1968Words

Learning, Memory, And Perception Assignment

Get free written samples by our Top-Notch subject experts and Assignment Helper team.

Eyewitness testimony is legal testimony that provides a legal touch to a case. It can rather record flawless experiences along with the memory that is respectable to a variety of biases and issues. It is crucial for many cases where eyewitnesses help the situation to pursue justice. The eyewitness or the person who is providing eyewitnesses can make mistakes as the rest of us with specific details that fail to remember (Braun et al., 2021). The whole event that had happened did not happen can also happen in eyewitnesses.

The Mistakes of eyewitnesses are commonly made in some way that can delay justice. There are two types of eyewitnesses as incident shall and intentional learning where intentional learning is a practice of gathering the information of every particular situation that comes in front of them. Apart from being something that occurs separately, the desire of learning a situation is always a priority for them. On the other hand, incidental learning is a practice where a person is learning from incidents that happen in front of them which are generally unplanned or unprepared (Gordon, & Thomas, 2017). Eyewitnesses are further discussed with theories to explain the eyewitness more effectively.

Source monitoring theory was proposed in 1993 by Johnson where he described that source monitoring is an error type of memory where some of these sources are incorrectly attributed to some extent that the collection of experience can be made. In psychological terms, These source monitoring is an unconscious state of mental test where the human brain generally performs in terms of identifying the real memory where accuracy as opposed to being for some source like a movie or a dream. People generally take a lot of sources for determining their memory for proving the accuracy (Greene et al., 2021). The information with multiple sources is activated where individuals decide themselves the appropriate source of their memory. The second theory is schema theory which was proposed by Bartlett in 1932. He proposed that this theory is based on the branch where our cognitive mind describes a pattern where the behavior or thought is organized. The organized category of collected information has a relationship among themselves where the understanding of the heiercercally category and Webbed complexity of the relationship with each other. Post events of information can be provided with the help of a certain framework for making a reconstruction of memory that generally recalls and can introduce a certain distortion of memories. These are the psychological theories that have explained the different kinds of eyewitnesses and their state of mind. On the other hand, the factors that influence eyewitnesses are also mentioned (Price, 2017). It is a large part that numerous factors generally influence the accuracy of eyewitness testimony which happens more often. The first one is memory reconstruction of Mind where common misconceptions build human memory where it works like a recorded video that allows people to consecutively replay such vision they have seen. It allowed the mind to reply to the conducted situation (Charman et al., 2018). A scientific reporter had reported that the reconstruction of memory is not replayed but on the other hand, the fragmentation of memory that people see in chunks puzzles them when they recall such memory. However, discussing and questioning certain events mainly alter the mind of people or they put perceptions on what they might have seen. The second influence issues that have lined up consecutively. The witness generally identifies certain aspects of true lineups where the photograph and physical appearance has happened (Hanc Eroglu et al., 2022). If the procedure has proper following where law and enforcement officers might unintentionally identify the witness who has chosen. For example, throw photographs are used in different sizes where they have different lighting. It might cause one person with a picture that has stood out on the other. The enforcement of the law has conducted lineup memories where the suspect has given an inadvertent single with the witness. The third aspect of the influential factor is the characteristics of the version where a witness is offered based on the identification with the suspect defining the feature or their characteristics. However, if the suspect is wearing a wig or any other accessory changes the look of the suspect then it might mislead the memory (Shapira & Pansky, 2019). The suspect might go without any justice given to the victim. The racial differences between the suspect and the witness might harm the identifications as well.



Multisensory integration is a multi-sensory illusion where more than one sensor is used for providing a witness. In other words, providing witness in terms of multiple sensory senses is the usage of eyes, nose, ears, skin, and tongue. These are the sensory organs that help to identify a situation where one cannot be the constructed or reconstituted component that has been created. The multi-sensory organs are classified into two different sensors as special as well as General senses (Ehrsson, 2020). The special senses have specialized organs which are devoted to the role of the organ, the nerves and fibers are dedicated to them where the occurrence of a specific body part is identified. General organs for sensors have no specialized sensory organ which has widely spread throughout the body such as touch temperature, pain pressure, or movement. According to the famous author “McGurk and McDonald" proposed an effect in 1976 which was reported to be a powerful multisensory illusion that has occurred in audiovisual speech. The most commonly used McGurk effect where the effect is defined as category cal change in the audio of reception that is induced with incongruent visuality of speech. this results in a single precept of visual speech. The hearing sometimes results in a speaking voice for the psychological term. In other words when the coordination of visuality and speech happens the brain starts collecting information through mouth lipsing auditory speech and the sound of a person. These are the sensors that people used for identifying the person that they have seen. On the other hand "Spatial ventriloquism" is another theory that has been used for making up the reception of special locations in terms of auditory stimulus that can be captured by visual stimuli. A phenomenon which has been termed as ventriloquism effect that refers to an indication of both spatial parameters, as well as temporal parameters, are critically used in the procession of real words that objectify the extra personal space. The theory works on certain things such as dummy lips moving where the human has back their sound with the dummy lips moving. This demonstrates the intersensory conflict of the brain where the dummy lips and voice confuses the human brain. The location and visual where moving lips are captured with the received voice is also captured by the brain such as a cinema when the speaker is far from the screen. According to McGurk ventriloquism, the effects have driven to audiovisual interaction where audio dominates the conflict full stop the super special resolution vision is a part of audiovisual interaction which is more weighted and heavier than the audio. The effects of audiovisual interaction have audio stimulus, multi-sensory perception, and visual stimulus that occurs with one visual stimulus. This effect was rediscovered in 2000 by Shams and earlier it was discovered in 1964 by Shiply. On the other hand, audio tactical interactions are characterized with "temporary numerosity judgments”. This technical characteristic has a balance, the reciprocal influence over the modality pairing that affects both spatial arrangements of simile as well as the attention over the temporal order of judgment is also described. The audio story interaction is the lexical synthesizer of estimation where less than 2.0% of the population is unknown (Sanders et al., 2019). As the hound and random sample were tested based on different synthesizers it has been seen that sounds like crunching sound with high-frequency amplifier chirping sound, as well as crisp sound, has a procession That depends on the taste with the sound coma with touch the temperature, smell, and movement. This is the psychological effect of making a procession of a particular thing with the sensory organ that has been mentioned in the above paragraph.

Multisensory organs are very beneficial for the human body. Multisensory helps or works as an alarm of the human body where they aid responses for detection along with speed responses. The sensory use is weak and affects sensory super addictive integration for certain situations. Such as when a dog approaches a cat the owner immediately guards its cat so that it can not harm the cat. This is the multisensory activity that was conducted by the owner where unisensory has affected the integrated responses along with the smaller super addictive responses. The brain encodes such information for the distribution of integration where the "visual cortex and olfactory cortex" are located. There are three possibilities of multi-sensory integration are the convergence of multi sensory areas inter aerial communication and temporal synchrony of neural firing.

Reference list


Braun, B. E., Zaragoza, M. S., Chrobak, Q. M., & Ithisuphalap, J. (2021). Correcting eyewitness suggestibility: does explanatory role predict resistance to correction?. Memory29(1), 59-77. Retrieved from: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=kent1605620664101365&disposition=inline [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Ehrsson, H. H. (2020). Multisensory processes in body ownership. Multisensory perception, 179-200. Retrieved from: http://www.ehrssonlab.se/pdfs/Ehrsson%20HH%202020%20Multisensory%20processes%20in%20body%20ownership.pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Gordon, L. T., & Thomas, A. K. (2017). The forward effects of testing on eyewitness memory: The tension between suggestibility and learning. Journal of Memory and Language95, 190-199. Retrieved from: http://www.thomas-camlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/32_Gordon-Thomas-2017.pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Greene, C. M., Bradshaw, R., Huston, C., & Murphy, G. (2021). The medium and the message: Comparing the effectiveness of six methods of misinformation delivery in an eyewitness memory paradigm. Journal of experimental psychology: applied. Retrieved from: https://psyarxiv.com/g4ua6/download?format=pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Price, L. (2017). Does Mindful Meditation Enhance Eyewitness Memory and Prevent the Misinformation Effect?. Retrieved from: https://digitalcommons.assumption.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=honorstheses [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Qi, H., Zhang, H. H., Hanceroglu, L., Caggianiello, J., & Roberts, K. P. (2018). The influence of mindfulness on young adolescents' eyewitness memory and suggestibility. Applied cognitive psychology32(6), 823-829. Retrieved from: http://people.uncw.edu/hakanr/documents/mindfulnessandeyewitnessmemory.pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Sanders, P., Thompson, B., Corballis, P., & Searchfield, G. (2019). On the timing of signals in multisensory integration and crossmodal interactions: a scoping review. Multisensory research32(6), 533-573. Retrieved from: https://scholar.archive.org/work/maqgvtiodvfqpmp3l5z3gpmjyi/access/wayback/https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/pstorage-brill-78784a5sas/15102875/MSR1331_SupplementarymaterialHT.pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Shapira, A. A., & Pansky, A. (2019). Cognitive and metacognitive determinants of eyewitness memory accuracy over time. Metacognition and Learning14(3), 437-461. Retrieved from: https://iipdm.haifa.ac.il/images/publications/Ainat_Pansky/Shapira%20%20Pansky%202019.pdf [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

Vredeveldt, A., Charman, S. D., den Blanken, A., & Hooydonk, M. (2018). Effects of cannabis on eyewitness memory: A field study. Applied cognitive psychology32(4), 420-428. Retrieved from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/acp.3414 [Retrieved on 01.08.2021]

35% OFF
Get best price for your work
  • 54000+ Project Delivered
  • 500+ Experts 24*7 Online Help

offer valid for limited time only*