Anytime I watch Monster Quest, UFO Hunter, or any of the other paranormal investigation type programs, the weight of their evidence always lies heaviest on eyewitness testimony. Whether it's bigfoot, the greys, or men-in-black, the sum of the "evidence" tends to be what somebody saw or heard. Or at least what somebody thought they saw or heard. If there were any doubts that this is fundamentally unreliable, here's another nail in the coffin. According to a report by Prof. Martin Conway of Leeds University:
Memories are essentially a construct from a variety of sources and experiences, Prof Conway says. They are not necessarily a factual account of what happened.
What's more, a significant proportion of people seem to be highly suggestible and will quite readily change what they remember if given appropriate cues.
Source: "What do you remember?" by Rebecca Fordham
I'd wonder why there is still such a reliance on eyewitnesses in these types of studies when we know that they are ultimately unreliable but the answer is obvious: without the eyewitnesses, there is nothing to study. No study means no program. Or, a very, very short program. Plus, what would they do with all those eyewitness reenactors?
|