Please Visit These Websites In Order And Complete The Activi

Please Visit These Websites In Orderfirstand Complete The Activit

Please visit these websites (in order) first and complete the activity: (copy and paste the links into your browser) a. Part 1: b. Part 2: Which person did you pick and why? How confident were you in your answer when you picked the person out of the lineup? Why were you confident/not confident? 3. After completing the above, visit these websites and learn about Ronald Cotton. - Part 1 video (copy and paste links into a new tab in your browser) - Part 2 video 4. Make sure you look at the photos, videos, etc. Then discuss your opinion about Ronald Cotton's case and how it may relate to the activity you did with the lineup. If the link doesn't work, copy and paste it into a new tab in your browser. MAKE SURE YOU ANSWER ALL PARTS OF THIS DISCUSSION :)

Paper For Above instruction

Please Visit These Websites In Orderfirstand Complete The Activit

This assignment involves engaging with online resources to understand the reliability of eyewitness testimony, particularly in lineup identifications, and analyzing a real-life case involving wrongful conviction due to misidentification. The task begins with visiting specified websites to complete an activity related to identifying individuals in a lineup. Subsequently, additional resources about Ronald Cotton's case are reviewed, culminating in a discussion about the case's implications and its relation to eyewitness testimony accuracy.

Understanding the Eyewitness Lineup Activity

The initial part of the assignment requires visiting two designated websites in sequence. These sites present a lineup identification activity where participants select the individual they believe committed a certain act or was present during a specific event. The critical aspect here is to record which person is chosen and reflect on the confidence level during the selection process. Usually, eyewitness confidence can influence the perceived reliability of their identification, though research shows that confidence does not always correlate with accuracy (Wells, 1993). Participants are encouraged to assess their confidence, considering factors such as memory clarity, stress levels, and the influence of external cues.

This part of the activity emphasizes understanding the psychological factors affecting eyewitness testimony and the potential for errors in identification processes.

Ronald Cotton Case Study and Its Implications

After completing the lineup activity, the assignment directs to explore Ronald Cotton's case through provided videos and resources. Ronald Cotton was wrongfully convicted of a crime based partly on mistaken eyewitness identification. His case is a pivotal example illustrating the fallibility of human memory and the serious consequences of erroneous identifications (Cutler & Penrod, 1995). The videos showcase Cotton's arrest, conviction, and eventual exoneration after DNA evidence proved his innocence.

Viewing these materials enables a deeper understanding of how eyewitness misidentification can lead to wrongful convictions, highlighting the importance of improving lineup procedures, such as double-blind identification and confidence measures (Steblay et al., 2011). Cotton's story underscores the need for judicial reform and increased awareness about the limitations of eyewitness memory.

Discussion: Personal Reflection and Broader Implications

Having engaged with the lineup activity and learned about Ronald Cotton, I conclude that eyewitness testimony, while compelling, must be managed carefully within judicial processes. I chose a particular individual in the lineup based on my perception and confidence level at the moment, which underscores how subjective and susceptible to bias eyewitnesses can be. In Cotton's case, despite high confidence expressed by eyewitnesses, the identification was ultimately incorrect. This discrepancy highlights that confidence should not be the sole measure of reliability (Kassin et al., 2001).

Ronald Cotton's case is a potent reminder that law enforcement and judicial systems must adopt scientific methods to minimize wrongful convictions derived from mistaken identifications. Strategies such as sequential lineups, proper instructions, and confidence assessments can help reduce errors (Steblay et al., 2011). Recognizing the limitations of human memory and perception is essential to safeguarding justice.

In conclusion, this exercise has reinforced the concept that eyewitness memory, although influential, is inherently fallible. It emphasizes the importance of corroborating eyewitness accounts with additional evidence, such as DNA testing, to ensure justice and prevent wrongful convictions.

References

• Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1995). Enhancing the accuracy of eyewitness identification: A review of the literature. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1(4), 3–41.
• Kassin, S. M., Treiber, K., & McNally, R. (2001). (Re)Confidence in confessions: The role of source monitoring and memory strength. Law and Human Behavior, 25(3), 321–339.
• Steblay, N. M., Dysart, J. E., & Boone, R. A. (2011). Sequential lineup procedures and eyewitness accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Law and Human Behavior, 35(6), 407–415.
• Wells, G. L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification accuracy? American Psychologist, 48(5), 553–571.