HomeComments on why one makes your favourite would also be interesting. This is for personal curiosity only - not connected with any market research.
4 posters
Weekly current events programmes on NZ free TV
Poll
Choose the closest to your favourite from the following
- [ 1 ]
[20%]
- [ 3 ]
- [60%]
- [ 1 ]
- [20%]
Total Votes: 5
relict- River-God
canterella- Nymph
Sunday because it has more NZ content than others and more in-depth approach to the stories.
60 minutes would be my second favourite, not as good as Sunday though.
20/20 has too much of US sensationalist crap.
60 minutes would be my second favourite, not as good as Sunday though.
20/20 has too much of US sensationalist crap.
master5o1- Cyclopes
neither because they are all shit.
relict- River-God
Well, 60 Minutes was certainly very interesting last night.
A story about how wrong eye witnesses can be with their belief about who they saw, and the tricks that memory can play.
A woman who was raped got a really good look at the perp's face, and decided to study it and remember it in order to get him convicted if she survived the ordeal. She lived, went to the police, got a good sketch made, then chose someone who looked very much like the rapist. From a live lineup, she chose the same person, and was told so, which helped cement her belief.
She had no doubt. When she later looked into the face of her rapist, there was never any flicker of recognition. The guy she chose (innocent) spent 11 years in jail until DNA testing proved his innocence, and the look-alike's guilt.
A memory expert (psych prof) showed an experiment that gave an explanation for the mistake. She asked the presenter to study three faces. After a few minutes she was given a memory test, where she was to identify the face she'd seen before from pairs of faces. The first set was easy, then she was given a pair that looked easy, but it was an altered face (same hair style) paired with a novel face. That is, she had seen neither before. She chose the altered face because it was familiar (same hair, similar facial features), and choosing it duped her brain into thinking he was the one she's seen at the beginning. Next, presented with the altered face and the original face with the same hair style, she was no longer able to pick the original face.
Also interesting was the end of the story ... after the innocent guy was released, and the guilty guy jailed (he ended up dying in jail), she apologised to the innocent man, for getting him convicted, etc. He forgave her. Even though she'd spent over 11 years hating him and wishing him dead, they became good friends, and worked together to promote improvements in the way that eye witnesses are dealt with in the justice system - standardising the way eye witnesses are asked questions, and trying to neutralise the effect of the questioner and method. For example, it is better not to have a line up at all, but to show the faces / people individually. This way you have to recognise a face on its own features (yes/no), and not from playing elimination (no/maybe). Even better is to use a computer programme to show the pictures /ask questions rather than an interviewer.
A story about how wrong eye witnesses can be with their belief about who they saw, and the tricks that memory can play.
A woman who was raped got a really good look at the perp's face, and decided to study it and remember it in order to get him convicted if she survived the ordeal. She lived, went to the police, got a good sketch made, then chose someone who looked very much like the rapist. From a live lineup, she chose the same person, and was told so, which helped cement her belief.
She had no doubt. When she later looked into the face of her rapist, there was never any flicker of recognition. The guy she chose (innocent) spent 11 years in jail until DNA testing proved his innocence, and the look-alike's guilt.
A memory expert (psych prof) showed an experiment that gave an explanation for the mistake. She asked the presenter to study three faces. After a few minutes she was given a memory test, where she was to identify the face she'd seen before from pairs of faces. The first set was easy, then she was given a pair that looked easy, but it was an altered face (same hair style) paired with a novel face. That is, she had seen neither before. She chose the altered face because it was familiar (same hair, similar facial features), and choosing it duped her brain into thinking he was the one she's seen at the beginning. Next, presented with the altered face and the original face with the same hair style, she was no longer able to pick the original face.
Also interesting was the end of the story ... after the innocent guy was released, and the guilty guy jailed (he ended up dying in jail), she apologised to the innocent man, for getting him convicted, etc. He forgave her. Even though she'd spent over 11 years hating him and wishing him dead, they became good friends, and worked together to promote improvements in the way that eye witnesses are dealt with in the justice system - standardising the way eye witnesses are asked questions, and trying to neutralise the effect of the questioner and method. For example, it is better not to have a line up at all, but to show the faces / people individually. This way you have to recognise a face on its own features (yes/no), and not from playing elimination (no/maybe). Even better is to use a computer programme to show the pictures /ask questions rather than an interviewer.
Last edited by relict on Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:58 am; edited 2 times in total
Hondanutter- Mortal
Damn, wanted to see that
60, minutes
60, minutes
relict- River-God
Reborn dolls. Adult women who buy, dress, change, shop with, and take walks with 'life like' dolls. I just don't get it!
Similar topics
