Almost everyday we hear about the effects of being positive on our health and social relationships. However, current research suggests that bad, negative moods can also be useful especially at improving one's memory.
Researchers found that people in bad moods were less susceptible to believing urban legends and rumors as well as being less prone to stereotype others or have a racial bias. The study found that those in a negative mood were better at remembering what they had seen and had more effective communication styles. Joseph Forgas, the study author wrote "....people in a negative mood are less prone to judgmental errors, are more resistant to eyewitness distortions and are better at producing high-quality, effective persuasive messages."
Better yet, the study suggests that being mad be very beneficial when something bad happens to you by bettering your ability to remember and identify the perpetrator. Because of this, it is more likely that law enforcement will be able to catch the perpetrator and hopefully lessen the likelihood of falsely accusing others.
According to this research, maybe law enforcement should consider deliberately making eyewitnesses mad in order to yield better results from their recollections of the crime. Anything that helps law enforcement catch whoever is responsible is good right?...but would intentionally making eyewitnesses who may already be emotionally distraught mad be ethical?
Researchers found that people in bad moods were less susceptible to believing urban legends and rumors as well as being less prone to stereotype others or have a racial bias. The study found that those in a negative mood were better at remembering what they had seen and had more effective communication styles. Joseph Forgas, the study author wrote "....people in a negative mood are less prone to judgmental errors, are more resistant to eyewitness distortions and are better at producing high-quality, effective persuasive messages."
Better yet, the study suggests that being mad be very beneficial when something bad happens to you by bettering your ability to remember and identify the perpetrator. Because of this, it is more likely that law enforcement will be able to catch the perpetrator and hopefully lessen the likelihood of falsely accusing others.
According to this research, maybe law enforcement should consider deliberately making eyewitnesses mad in order to yield better results from their recollections of the crime. Anything that helps law enforcement catch whoever is responsible is good right?...but would intentionally making eyewitnesses who may already be emotionally distraught mad be ethical?
Who would've thought that being rude, critical, biased, and judgemental could be beneficial in helping someone?! I never thought about this before, but it makes sense, because I know that when I'm in a bad mood I can be very critical of others-especially their pysical features, mainly because that's usually all we know about strangers we pass on the street. So if I happen to be walking across campus being judgemental of people's hair style that day, or their wardrobe choice, and someone starts attacking people I would be much more likely to more accurately identify the attacker due to my intensified awareness of his physical characteristics.
Just to clarify: I am not endorsing the idea that people should try to be in a bad mood just in case they happen to witness a crime. :)
This is interesting. I had always thought that the better mood you are in, the more it would benefit yourself as well as other people. Now that I have read this study, I know that being in a bad mood could have it's advantages. I do think that the police should be able to upset the eyewitnesses so they could be able to help find the right suspect, but only upset them to an extent. I think that the eyewitness would be upset at the officer for awhile, but once they realize that they were the one who gave the right descriptions and helped find the suspect, they would be glad that they could help. As long as the police do not take the badgering to the next level, I think it would be a good idea to get the eyewitness a little upset. Anything to catch a suspect right?
To answer your question, no, it would not be ethical to intentionally provoke a witness. The criminal justice system has certain recommended procedures for obtaining memory evidence, and making the witness angry is not one of them:) Seriously though, many studies have demonstrated the value of open ended questions, a calm interrogator, and replaying the events in the mind. While the findings in this particular study are interesting, I think the results are best used to add to the growing body of science on the issue of memory evidence in general. We have all read studies and reports that make certain claims, but it is our job as psychologists to determine the generalizability of the findings. In this case, I am not sure the findings are much use on their own merit, but the results may eventually prove useful in the future. But hey, at least we're talking about this right?