No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Eyewitness Testimony
Abstract
Eyewitnesses have always played a fundamental role in the legal process. However, eyewitness evidence is not always as reliable or as accurate as one might hope, given the weight that decision makers often ascribe to it. In this article, we review some of the many factors that can determine the reliability of witness testimony, including factors that are, and those that are not, within the control of investigative and judicial processes. In doing so, we consider how policies might assist in ensuring that witness testimony can play the most effective and informative role in the legal process as possible.
... On average, 40% of witnesses in criminal cases are asked to complete a lineup identification task (Steblay et al., 2001), which is constructed by placing a suspect among innocent people (i.e., foils). An identification task is primarily a recognition task, testing the hypothesis that the perpetrator of a crime is present among the foils (Charman & Wells, 2007;Nash et al., 2015). As such, a lineup has three outcomes: Witnesses could identify the suspect as the perpetrator, identify a foil as the perpetrator, or reject the lineup (i.e., indicate that the perpetrator is absent from the lineup). ...
... Although there have been many positive efforts to improve lineup construction (Demarchi & Py, 2003;Hope & Sauer, 2014;Wells & Olson, 2003) and administration (Clark et al., 2008;Malpass & Devine, 1981;Nash et al., 2015), only a small set of studies has investigated the nature and significance of the cognitive processes used during identification tasks. A better understanding of these processes may improve our understanding of eyewitness identifications. ...
... This relationship varies according to several factors, perhaps most important being whether the eyewitness chooses someone in the lineup, or not: The relationship between confidence and accuracy is observed sometimes only for choosers, and not for non-choosers (Brewer & Wells, 2006); other times it is a matter of degree, and sometimes the relation is even negative (Sauerland & Sporer, 2007). Moreover, confidence is more strongly related to accuracy in the case of an accurate identification than for an accurate rejection (Memon et al., 2003;Nash et al., 2015;Wells & Olson, 2003). Under pristine lineup conditions, the more eyewitnesses report being confident, the more likely they are to make accurate identifications (Wixted & Wells, 2017). ...
Identifying a suspect is critical for successful criminal investigations. Research focused on two decision processes during lineup identification, namely ‘automatic recognition’ and ‘elimination’ strategy, and their relation to identification accuracy. In this article, we report two experiments conducted in France and South Africa, which further examine strategies in eyewitness decision-making. We first used a modified-RSA (Retrospective Self Awareness; Kassin, 1985) interview method to construct questionnaires to have finer-grained measures of cognitive processes involved in lineup identification. Studies 1 and 2 tested the relevance of the questionnaire in each of the countries, and factor analysis yielded three common factors among the countries, namely the expected ‘automatic recognition’, and ‘elimination’ strategies, as well as an additional familiarity related factor. Logistic regressions showed that witnesses who reported using a familiarity feeling and/or an ‘elimination strategy’ to conduct their decision, were less likely to make correct decisions than witnesses who reported using ‘automatic recognition’.
... Wells et al., 2006). Eyewitness identifications also influence juries and judges (Brewer & Wells, 2011;Cutler et al., 1990;Nash et al., 2015) despite eyewitness identifications being prone to errors (Albright, 2017;Wells et al., 2015). Largely, eyewitness identification research has focused on two main areas: (1) the law-enforcement practices (i.e. ...
Distance, lighting, and facial masking negatively impact eyewitness identification accuracy. We investigated their combined effect on accuracy and how internal (e.g., eyes) versus external (e.g., hair) masking impacts accuracy. Using live targets witnessed by 1325 participants, we investigated the effects of distance (5m, 12.5m, 20m), lighting (optimal:300lx, suboptimal:2lx), facial masking (no facial masking, sunglasses, hood, sunglasses & hood), and eyewitness age (5-90) on identification accuracy in target-present (TP) or target-absent (TA) eight-person simultaneous photograph line-ups. TP identification accuracy, with no facial masking, for all participants was .69 (.96 for only 18-44-year-old choosers) at 5m, .34 (.58) at 12.5m, and .17 (.42) at 20m. TA rejection accuracy for all participants was .63 (.60 for only 18-44-year-olds) at 5m, .42 (.54) at 12.5m, and .46 (.46) at 20m. Facial masking further decreased accuracy; internal facial masking had the strongest negative effect. The combined negative effects of distance, lighting, and facial masking resulted in chance-level performance in TP line-ups (i.e., .125) in some instances. We also found a positive association between accuracy and high confidence and shorter response times. We recommend that law enforcement agencies and researchers report these variables to allow for the postdiction of the likely accuracy of an eyewitness decision.
... An important additional feature during the description and identification phase is the subjective confidence of the witness in his/her statements and decisions. Eyewitness reports tend to be less objective than other forms of evidence, however, they are often perceived as more convincing than other types of evidence, especially if such reports are expressed with high levels of confidence (Nash et al., 2015). The true effect of confidence on description and identification accuracy, in contrast, was not as well documented for a long time. ...
Mugbook searches are conducted in case a suspect is not known and to assess if a previously convicted person might be recognized as a potential culprit. The goal of the two experiments reported here was to analyze if prior statements and information about the suspect can aid in the evaluation if such a mugbook search is subsequently advised or not. In experiment 1, memory accuracy for person descriptors was tested in order to analyze, which attributes could be chosen to down-scale the mugbook prior to testing. Results showed that age was the most accurate descriptor, followed by ethnicity and height. At the same time self-assessed low subjective accuracy of culprit descriptions by the witness seemed to be divergent to the objective actual performance accuracy. In experiment 2, a mugbook search was conducted after participants viewed a video of a staged crime and gave a description of the culprit. Results showed that accuracy in mugbook searches correlated positively with the total number of person descriptors given by the witness as well as with witness’ description of external facial features. Predictive confidence (i.e., subjective rating of own performance in the subsequent mugbook search), however did not show any relation to the identification accuracy in the actual mugbook search. These results highlight the notion that mugbooks should not be conducted according to the subjective estimation of the witness’ performance but more according to the actual statements and descriptions that the witness can give about the culprit.
... Eyewitness identification evidence of alleged suspects is frequently used by courts and is a highly impactful piece of evidence [1][2][3]. However, the majority of eyewitness research is limited by the boundaries set by laboratory designs where a common stimulus is a prerecorded video that is presented on a tv or monitor screen (hereafter referred to as 2D). ...
In eyewitness research the frequent use of video playback presented on a computer screen (i.e., 2D videos) in laboratory-based research is problematic due to the low realism of this method when presenting, for example, threatening (and non-threatening) first-person (and third-person) scenarios. However, in contrast to 2D videos, 360-degree videos presented in virtual reality (VR) presents the opportunity of achieving more realistic and immersive scenarios that might be better suited to mimic real-life incidents, as for example, in the case of a threatening first-person robbery. In the present study, we asked 37 participants to watch eight pre-recorded threatening or non-threatening 2D and VR videos, viewed from either a first- or third-person perspective. After each video, participants assessed the observed target’s appearance and were then presented with either a target present (TP) or target absent (TA) six-person photograph line-up. We expected that VR would result in higher degrees of accuracy in both TP and TA line-ups compared with 2D and that the differences between manipulations would be more pronounced within VR compared with 2D. We found that TP (but not TA) accuracy was higher in 2D compared with VR videos (91 vs. 66%), that there was no main effect of perspective, and that threatening scenes increased TP (but not TA) accuracy compared to non-threatening scenes (86 vs. 70%). Furthermore, in VR (but not in 2D), threatening scenes increased TP (but not TA) accuracy compared with non-threatening scenes (85 vs. 40%). The results go against the expected increased accuracy in VR (vs. 2D) videos but support the notion that threatening (vs. non-threatening) scenes can increase identification accuracy in VR but not necessarily in 2D.
... When an eyewitness sees a perpetrator commit a crime and the police later ask the witness to try to identify the perpetrator from a photograph line-up that contains the police suspect, an identification of the suspect is viewed as direct evidence of the suspect's guilt; in contrast to circumstantial evidence, such as, DNA traces (Wells, Memon, & Penrod, 2006). Moreover, eyewitness identifications frequently play an important role in the judicial system, often having an influential effect on judges and jurors (Brewer & Wells, 2011;Cutler, Penrod, & Dexter, 1990;Nash, Hanczakowski, & Mazzoni, 2015). Nevertheless, the pitfalls inherent in relying on eyewitness identification are exemplified by the large proportion of misidentifications that have contributed to wrongful convictions. ...
(Abbreviated):
The four studies included in this thesis are based on two samples with
a total of 1766 participants and 7657 line-up decisions in a live ecological setup. To
the best of our knowledge, the data collection of Study I represents the largest live
eyewitness experiment ever conducted. Our sample is also unique in that it contains
an age range between 6 and 77 years of age. The findings of our studies are thus
highly generalizable. These studies are the first to establish upper visual
identification thresholds for reliable eyewitness identification. In optimal viewing
conditions (i.e., no distractions, daylight, a 20 second duration) eyewitness accuracy
was only approximately 50% at 5–10 meters. At 40 meters, the accuracy was at
approximately 30%, and after 100 meters, line-ups had no added value. As there
were age differences, both age and distance need to be considered together. We also
found that in low light the upper distance threshold is considerably shorter; after 20
meters identification accuracy is at chance level.
... Eyewitness identifications of alleged suspects feature prominently within the judicial system and can have a powerful effect on both judges and jurors (Brewer & Wells, 2011;Cutler, Penrod, & Dexter, 1990;Nash, Hanczakowski, & Mazzoni, 2015). However, they are fraught with difficulties and there is a need to increase our knowledge of factors that could be used to estimate their reliability in individual cases. ...
Increased distance between an eyewitness and a culprit decreases the accuracy of eyewitness identifications, but the maximum distance at which reliable observations can still be made is unknown. Our aim was to identify this threshold. We hypothesized that increased distance would decrease identification, rejection accuracy, confidence and would increase response time. We expected an interaction effect, where increased distance would more negatively affect younger and older participants (vs. young adults), resulting in age-group specific distance thresholds where diagnosticity would be 1. We presented participants with 4 live targets at distances between 5 m and 110 m using an 8-person computerized line-up task. We used simultaneous and sequential target-absent or target-present line-ups and presented these to 1,588 participants (age range = 6-77; 61% female; 95% Finns), resulting in 6,233 responses. We found that at 40 m diagnosticity was 50% lower than at 5 m and with increased distance diagnosticity tapered off until it was 1 (±0.5) at 100 m for all age groups and line-up types. However, young children (age range = 6-11) and older adults (age range = 45-77) reached a diagnosticity of 1 at shorter distances compared with older children (age range = 12-17) and young adults (age range = 18-44). We found that confidence dropped with increased distance, response time remained stable, and high confidence and shorter response times were associated with identification accuracy up to 40 m. We conclude that age and line-up type moderate the effect distance has on eyewitness accuracy and that there are perceptual distance thresholds at which an eyewitness can no longer reliably encode and later identify a culprit. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
This paper introduces a novel software solution to address the challenges of automated identification of Areas of Interest (AOIs) in dynamic, head-mounted display virtual reality (VR) environments, with a focus on applications in forensic psychology. Traditional eye-tracking tools often require manual annotation of AOIs when analyzing moving objects, such as faces, in dynamic 360-degree VR scenarios—a process that is time-intensive. The presented software utilizes RetinaFace to generate consistent AOIs by dynamically tracking facial coordinates across video frames, accounting for variability in head movements. Outputs are seamlessly formatted for analysis in iMotions, enabling robust synchronization and visualization of gaze data. In a pilot study with 16 participants, validation against manual annotation confirmed the system’s high accuracy (92.2%). By automating a previously manual process, the software provides researchers with an efficient and scalable tool for analyzing complex visual attention data, significantly enhancing the feasibility of large-scale VR studies in forensic and psychological research. An empirical example illustrates how the software can be used.
Fair and objective justice requires compliance by all its participants with legally established principles. At the same time, in law enforcement practice there are cases of falsification of evidence, which is caused by various circumstances, and motivational factors that are guided by the participants in the process, in particular, the witness and the victim. That is why similar acts are criminalized, and the scientific community has an updated task to develop substantiated recommendations for improving the quality of investigations of similar facts. Taking into account the significant importance of special knowledge in similar criminal proceedings, which is evidenced by the analysis of court practice, the purpose of the article is defined as the clarification of typical forms of special knowledge used during the pre-trial investigation of knowingly false statements by witnesses and victims, the specifics of their implementation. Based on the results of the research, it was determined that the appointment of a forensic handwriting examination, a forensic psychiatric examination, a forensic psychological examination, in particular with the use of a polygraph, a forensic telecommunications examination, and less often a technical examination of a document is typical. Each of the outlined forensic examinations has its specifics that need to be considered. Prospects for further scientific research are outlined.
Prior research shows that increased distance and decreased light result in less correct eyewitness identifications, yet their combined effect is not well understood. The aim of the present study was to establish the maximum distance in low lux (lx) where an eyewitness’s later identification in target present (TP) line-ups is no longer reliable. We randomized participants (N = 178) into one of three lx conditions (high:300 lx, medium:10 lx, low:0.7 lx) and presented them with eight targets (one at a time) at eight separate distances (6–20 m). Each target-presentation was followed by an 8-person simultaneous TP line-up (i.e., there was a .125 probability of choosing the target correctly by chance). We found that the rate of correct TP identifications decreased with increased distance in all lx conditions. At 20 m the rate of correct TP identifications was .53 in the high lx condition, .41 in the medium lx condition and .11 in the low lx condition. The generalizability of our findings to overall eyewitness accuracy is limited by the exclusion of target absent line-ups, yet our findings show that reliable and correct target present identifications are very unlikely following observations made in low lighting (0.7 lx) at 20 m.
Prior research shows that increased distance and decreased light result in less correct eyewitness identifications, yet their combined effect is unknown. The aim of the present study was to establish the maximum distance in low lux (lx) where an eyewitness’s later identification in target present (TP) line-ups is no longer reliable. We randomized participants (N = 178) into one of three lx conditions (high:300lx, medium:10lx, low:0.7lx) and presented them with eight targets (one at a time) at eight separate distances (6-20 meters). Each target-presentation was followed by an 8-person simultaneous TP line-up (i.e., there was a .125 probability of choosing the target correctly by chance). We found that the rate of correct TP identifications decreased with increased distance in all lx conditions. At 20 meters the rate of correct TP identifications was .53 in the high lx condition, .41 in the medium lx condition and .11 in the low lx condition. The generalizability of our findings to overall eyewitness accuracy is limited by the exclusion of target absent line-ups, yet our findings show that reliable and correct target present identifications are very unlikely following observations made in low lighting (0.7 lx) at 20 meters.
Increased distance between an eyewitness and a culprit decreases the accuracy of eyewitness identifications, but the maximum distance at which reliable observations can still be made is unknown. Our aim was to identify this threshold.
We hypothesized that increased distance would decrease identification and rejection accuracy, confidence, and increase response time. We expected an interaction effect, where increased distance would more negatively affect younger and older participants (vs. young adults), resulting in age-group specific distance thresholds where diagnosticity would be 1. We presented participants with four live targets at distances between 5-110 meters (m) using an eight-person computerized line-up task. We employed simultaneous and sequential target-absent or target-present line-ups and presented these to 1588 participants (age range 6-77; 61% female, 95% Finns) resulting in 6233 responses. We found that at 40m diagnosticity was 50% lower than at 5m, and with increased distance diagnosticity tapered off until it was 1 (+/- 0.5) at 100m for all age groups and line-up types. However, young children (6-11) and older adults (45-77) reached a diagnosticity of 1 at shorter distances compared with older children (12-17) and young adults (18-44). We found that with increased distance, confidence dropped whereas response time remained stable, and that high confidence and shorter response times were associated with identification accuracy up to 40m. We conclude that age and line-up type moderate the effect distance has on eyewitness accuracy and that there are perceptual distance thresholds at which an eyewitness can no longer reliably encode and later identify a culprit.
Two experiments investigated context effects in “weapon focus.” In Experiment 1, undergraduates who watched a videotape depicting an armed man provided less accurate descriptions of him if the action occurred in a setting in which a gun is unexpected rather than commonly seen. Identification accuracy did not vary, and the degree of threat in the man's behavior had no effect. In Experiment 2, witnesses' descriptions were poorer if the target carried an object that was inconsistent with his occupation (as indicated by his clothing style) and better if the object and occupation were not inconsistent. The results of both experiments imply that weapon focus may occur because weapons are surprising and unexpected within many contexts in which they appear.
Investigated the effectiveness of sequential lineup presentation as a means of reducing false identifications with little or no loss in accurate identifications. A crime was staged for 240 unsuspecting eyewitnesses (undergraduates) either individually or in pairs. One-fourth of the Ss attempted identifications in each of 4 lineup conditions: 6 pictures were presented either simultaneously, as used in traditional procedures, or sequentially, in which yes/no judgments were made for each picture; each procedure either contained the photograph of the criminal–confederate or a picture of a similar looking replacement. Results indicate that sequential lineup presentation significantly reduced false identifications but did not significantly influence correct identifications when compared with a simultaneous procedure. It is concluded that sequential presentation of lineups can reduce false identifications of innocent suspects by reducing eyewitnesses' reliance on relative-judgment processes. (18 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A firm rather than a friendly interviewer demeanour may make interviewees more likely to alter their initial responses to questions during requestioning. Conversely, warnings that an interviewer may attempt to be misleading may lower interviewees’ trust, heightening their vigilance and accuracy. Participants were tested under one of four conditions: ‘Friendly’ or ‘Firm’ interviewer demeanour, with or without warnings to be vigilant under questioning. The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale 2 (GSS 2) was adapted to include only questions which were not overtly leading, based on each scale’s narrative. The standard GSS ‘Shift’, ‘Memory Recall’, and ‘Total Confabulation’ scores were calculated for each condition.Interviewees were most likely to alter their initial answers to questions when the interviewer adopted a Firm demeanour, without a warning to be vigilant. These findings support the predictions of the Gudjonsson and Clark (1986) model of interrogative suggestibility which relate to the effects of interrogative pressure.
Eye-closure may help people remember live and videotaped mundane events and videotaped violent events. The present study extended this research by examining memory for a forensically relevant live event (a staged verbal altercation) and by interviewing witnesses under naturalistic conditions. Ninety-six witnesses were interviewed either inside in a quiet setting or outside on a busy street, with eyes open or closed. In free recall, eye-closure significantly increased the number of correct details reported, without harming testimonial accuracy. These benefits were significant for witnesses interviewed inside but not for witnesses interviewed outside. This finding highlights the potential role of spontaneous mental context reinstatement in the eye-closure effect. In cued recall, eye-closure improved fine-grain correct recall of visual details for both groups of witnesses. From an applied perspective, the findings suggest that police interviewers should instruct witnesses to close their eyes, both during initial statements taken on the street and during full interviews conducted at the police station.
eyewitness memory; eye-closure; investigative interviewing; grain size;
mental context reinstatement; environmental distraction
A police lineup presents a real-world signal-detection problem because there are two possible states of the world (the suspect is either innocent or guilty), some degree of information about the true state of the world is available (the eyewitness has some degree of memory for the perpetrator), and a decision is made (identifying the suspect or not). A similar state of affairs applies to diagnostic tests in medicine because, in a patient, the disease is either present or absent, a diagnostic test yields some degree of information about the true state of affairs, and a decision is made about the presence or absence of the disease. In medicine, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis is the standard method for assessing diagnostic accuracy. By contrast, in the eyewitness memory literature, this powerful technique has never been used. Instead, researchers have attempted to assess the diagnostic performance of different lineup procedures using methods that cannot identify the better procedure (e.g., by computing a diagnosticity ratio). Here, we describe the basics of ROC analysis, explaining why it is needed and showing how to use it to measure the performance of different lineup procedures. To illustrate the unique advantages of this technique, we also report 3 ROC experiments that were designed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of simultaneous versus sequential lineups. According to our findings, the sequential procedure appears to be inferior to the simultaneous procedure in discriminating between the presence versus absence of a guilty suspect in a lineup. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Weapon focus is frequently cited as a factor in eyewitness testimony, and is broadly defined as a weapon-related decrease in performance on subsequent tests of memory for those elements of an event or visual scene concurrent to the weapon. This effect has been attributed to either (a) physiological or emotional arousal that narrows the attentional beam (arousal/threat hypothesis), or (b) the cognitive demands inherent in processing an unusual object (e.g. weapon) that is incongruent with the schema representing the visual scene (unusual item hypothesis). Meta-analytical techniques were applied to test these theories as well as to evaluate the prospect of weapon focus in real-world criminal investigations. Our findings indicated an effect of weapon presence overall (g = 0.53) that was significantly influenced by retention interval, exposure duration, and threat but unaffected by whether the event occurred in a laboratory, simulation, or real- world environment.
There is widespread agreement among researchers that the correlation between identification accuracy and confidence in identification judgments is weak. For this reason, many experts caution against heavy reliance on confidence when evaluating identification accuracy. The authors present a meta-analytic review of 30 studies using staged-event methods that include target-present and target-absent lineups. Although the overall confidence–accuracy correlation in these studies corresponds to that reported in previous reviews, including choice as a moderator variable leads to a somewhat different conclusion. For choosers (those making positive identification), the confidence–accuracy correlation was reliably and consistently higher than for nonchoosers. In addition, the mean confidence level for correct choosers is higher than that for incorrect choosers in every study. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Inasmuch as a completely satisfactory estimate of effect size for the eyewitness accuracy-confidence relation does not exist, we conducted a meta-analysis of 35 staged-event studies. Estimated
r = .25 (
d = .52), with a 95% confidence interval of .08 to .42. Sampling error accounted for 52% of the variation in
r, leaving room for measurement error and possibly moderator variables to account for the remaining variation. Further analysis identified duration of target face exposure as a moderator variable, providing support for Deffenbacher's (1980) optimality hypothesis. When corrected for the attenuating effect of sampling error in the accuracy-confidence correlations, the correlation of exposure duration and the accuracy-confidence correlation was .51: Longer exposures allowed for greater predictability of accuracy from confidence. Even through correlation for unreliability in the confidence measure produces a higher estimate of the population correlation of accuracy and confidence, .34, one must be cautious in assessing the utility of confidence for predicting accuracy in actual cases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The relationship between eyewitness confidence and accuracy as measured by the ψ point-biserial correlation has been described as poor or even nonexistent in the literature on lineup identifications. In this article, 3 arguments are made. First, a low point-biserial correlation is compatible with good or even perfect calibration (realism) of confidence, and the correlation provides no information about whether witnesses over- or underestimate the probability of a correct identification. Second, point-biserial correlations provide almost no information about whether confidence is diagnostic in the sense that it should be taken into account by the court when evaluating eyewitness identifications. Third, useful information is provided by calibration analysis and computation of diagnosticity indices. These arguments are illustrated with data from an experiment with photo-confrontations that rely on photo material used by the Swedish Police and where foils were selected by experienced police officers in the manner of routine investigations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
107 undergraduate eyewitnesses to a staged theft made identifications from a photo spread and then responded to 11 questions that measured their memory for peripheral details. Results indicate that witnesses who accurately identified the thief (
n = 57) averaged fewer correct answers on the peripheral details test than did eyewitnesses who identified an innocent person (
n = 32). The remaining witnesses (
n = 18) made no identification. 94 undergraduates acting as jurors viewed cross-examinations of 47 accurate and 24 inaccurate eyewitnesses and indicated their belief that the witness had or had not properly identified the thief. The cross-examination that scrutinized and documented the witnesses' memory for trivial details lowered Ss' belief of the eyewitnesses' identification accuracy. This discrediting effect was stronger for accurate than for inaccurate eyewitnesses. It is argued that jurors inappropriately assumed a
positive correlation between accuracy in identifying the thief and memory for peripheral details. (18 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The Cognitive Interview (CI) is a well-established protocol for interviewing witnesses. The current article presents a study space analysis of laboratory studies of the CI together with an empirical meta-analysis summarizing the past 25 years of research. The study space comprises 57 published articles (65 experiments) on the CI, providing an assessment of the boundary conditions underlying the analysis and application of this interview protocol. The current meta-analysis includes 46 published articles, including 20 articles published since the last meta-analysis conducted a decade earlier (Köhnken, Milne, Memon, & Bull, 1999). Reassuringly for practitioners, the findings of the original meta-analysis were replicated with a large and significant increase in correct details and a small increase in errors. In addition we found that there were no differences in the rate at which details are confabulated. Importantly, the effect sizes were unaffected by the inclusion of recent studies using modified versions of the CI. The CI appeared to benefit older adult witnesses even more than younger adults. We highlight trends and gaps in research and discuss how our findings can inform policy and training decisions.
There is increasing evidence that false eyewitness identification is the primary cause of the conviction of innocent people. In 1996, the American Psychology/Law Society and Division 41 of the American Psychological Association appointed a subcommittee to review scientific evidence and make recommendations regarding the best procedures for constructing and conducting lineups and photospreads. Three important themes from the scientific literature relevant to lineup methods were identified and reviewed, namely relative-judgment processes, the lineups-as-experiments analogy, and confidence malleability. Recommendations are made that double-blind lineup testing should be used, that eyewitnesses should be forewarned that the culprit might not be present, that distractors should be selected based on the eyewitness's verbal description of the perpetrator, and that confidence should be assessed and recorded at the time of identification. The potential costs and benefits of these recommendations are discussed.
Feedback administered to eyewitnesses after they make a line-up identification dramatically distorts a wide range of retrospective judgements (e.g. G. L. Wells & A. L. Bradfield, 1998 Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 360–376.). This paper presents a meta-analysis of extant research on post-identification feedback, including 20 experimental tests with over 2400 participant-witnesses. The effect of confirming feedback (i.e. ‘Good, you identified the suspect’) was robust. Large effect sizes were obtained for most dependent measures, including the key measures of retrospective certainty, view and attention. Smaller effect sizes were obtained for so-called objective measures (e.g. length of time the culprit was in view) and comparisons between disconfirming feedback and control conditions. This meta-analysis demonstrates the reliability and robustness of the post-identification feedback effect. It reinforces recommendations for double-blind testing, recording of eyewitness reports immediately after an identification is made, and reconsideration by court systems of variables currently recommended for consideration in eyewitness evaluations. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Although psychologists have urged police officers to use double blind line-up procedures during their investigations, police officers state that these would be difficult to administer and most have been reluctant to implement this change. Four studies examine whether lay people's judgements about the guilt of a suspect vary according to whether a brief written summary of a case described the identification procedure as double blind or non-double blind. The effects were all small (and almost all non-significant). Most people do not treat double blind line-ups differently from non-double blind line-ups when assessing the guilt of a defendant. Either police investigators should stop using this biased method or police investigators and others in the judicial system (e.g. jurors, judges) should be informed of this bias when evaluating results from any line-up. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
False information can influence people's beliefs and memories. But can fabricated evidence induce individuals to accuse another person of doing something they never did? We examined whether exposure to a fabricated video could produce false eyewitness testimony. Subjects completed a gambling task alongside a confederate subject, and later we falsely told subjects that their partner had cheated on the task. Some subjects viewed a digitally manipulated video of their partner cheating; some were told that video evidence of the cheating exists; and others were not told anything about video evidence. Subjects were asked to sign a statement confirming that they witnessed the incident and that their corroboration could be used in disciplinary action against the accused. See-video subjects were three times more likely to sign the statement than Told-video and Control subjects. Fabricated evidence may, indeed, produce false eyewitness testimony; we discuss probable cognitive mechanisms. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Past research has considered the impact of biased police lineup instructions upon eyewitness lineup performance. Biased instructions either suggest to the eyewitness that the perpetrator is in the lineup or otherwise discourage a no choice response. A meta-analysis of 18 studies was employed to review the hypothesis that biased instructions lead to greater willingness to choose and less accurate lineup identifications than do unbiased instructions. The role of moderating variables in the instruction procedure was also considered. In support of the hypothesis, a significantly higher level of choosing followed biased instructions. Lineup type moderated performance accuracy, however. For target-absent lineups the increased level of choosing following biased instructions resulted in reduced identification accuracy. Biased instructions within a target-present lineup generated a higher level of confidence, but had minimal impact on accuracy. Implications for police practice are discussed.
Previous treatments of eyewitness lineups have focused exclusively on the importance of homogeneity (similarity of common features) in the physical characteristics of lineup members. This has led to some confusion about the proper way to select distracters. We argue that distracters should not be selected for their similarity to the suspect but rather for their similarity to the witness's description of the culprit. The similarity-to-suspect strategy fails to define limits to the number, type, and degree of featureal matching and falls prey to the logical extension that a good lineup is composed of the suspect's clones. Accordingly, the similarity-to-suspect strategy has no supportive logic in recognition memory theory and gives no credit to the importance of hit rates. The similarity-to-witness's-description-of-culprit criterion, on the other hand, specifies a finite and manageable set of feature requirements for distracters, articulates a role for heterogeneous features, meets all functional requirements for fairness to the suspect, has a supportive logic in recognition memory theory, preserves hit rates, and is not subject to the clone argument.
Surveys typically characterize lay knowledge of eyewitness factors as low and highly variable. However, there are notable differences across methodologies, samples, and individual factors. To examine these differences systematically, we took a meta-analytic approach to reviewing the findings of 23 surveys assessing lay knowledge of eyewitness issues. Our analyses examined the beliefs of 4,669 respondents. Overall, respondents correctly agreed with survey items approximately two-thirds of the time. Results revealed significant differences in performance as a function of variable type, question format, and over time. We found few differences as a function of sample type, publication status, or jurisdiction. Although performance varied, a majority of lay respondents achieved "correct" consensus for as many as 11 of the 16 items included in this review.
Witnesses sometimes report event details that are acquired solely from another witness. We reevaluated the potency of this memory conformity effect. After viewing a crime video, some participants learned about nonwitnessed details via discussion (dyad group), reading another participant's report (read group), or watching another version of the video (both-video group). In Experiment 1, these participants often reported nonwitnessed details, but on a source-judgment test most details were attributed primarily to the actual source rather than to the video. In addition, the dyad group was not more likely than the read or both-video groups to report nonwitnessed details. Participants in Experiment 2 were explicitly discouraged from providing details that were remembered from the secondary source only. These postwarning instructions substantially reduced the memory conformity effect, and a dyad group was not more likely than a read group to report nonwitnessed details. Encouraging source monitoring at test can reduce the negative consequences of co-witness collaboration.
The claim that a person's memory for an event may be altered by information encountered after the event has been influential in shaping current conceptions of memory. The basis for the claim is a series of studies showing that subjects who are given false or misleading information about a previously witnessed event perform more poorly on tests of memory for the event than subjects who are not misled. In this article we argue that the available evidence does not imply that misleading postevent information impairs memory for the original event, because the procedure used in previous studies is inappropriate for assessing effects of misleading information on memory. We then introduce a more appropriate procedure and report six experiments using this procedure. We conclude from the results that misleading postevent information has no effect on memory for the original event. We then review several recent studies that seem to contradict this conclusion, showing that the studies do not pose problems for our position. Finally, we discuss the implications of our conclusions for broader issues concerning memory.
This research compared the effectiveness of three interview procedures for optimizing eyewitness memory performance: (a) the "cognitive interview" based on memory-retrieval mnemonics from current memory theory, (b) the presently controversial hypnosis interview, and (c) the standard (control) police interview. These methods were evaluated empirically in a controlled, yet ecologically valid, laboratory setting. Eighty-nine subjects viewed police training films of simulated violent crimes and were questioned individually in interactive interviews 48 hours later by experienced law-enforcement personnel. Both the cognitive and hypnosis procedures elicited a significantly greater number of correct items of information from the subjects than did the standard interview. This result, which held even for the most critical facts from the films, was most pronounced for crime scenarios in which the density of events was high. The number of incorrect items of information generated did not differ across the three interview conditions. The observed memory enhancement was interpreted in terms of the memory-guidance techniques common to both the cognitive and hypnosis interviews. Neither differential questioning time nor heightened subject or interviewer motivation could explain the results.
In order to assess a criminal suspect's ability to make a reliable statement, performance on three measures--interrogative suggestibility, confabulation and acquiescence--may be used. This paper presents preliminary data on these measures for people with mild learning disabilities (Full Scale IQ [FSIQ]: 57-75). It was found that they were more suggestible than their average ability counterparts (FSIQ: 83-111) because they were much more susceptible to 'leading questions'. They also confabulated more and were more acquiescent. Overall, the data emphasized their potential vulnerability to giving erroneous testimony during interrogations.
To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured interview protocol (NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol) operationalizing universally recommended guidelines for forensic interviews.
The NICHD Investigative Protocol was designed to maximize the amount of information obtained using recall memory probes, which are likely to elicit more accurate information than recognition memory probes. Forensic investigators were trained to use the NICHD protocol while conducting feedback-monitored simulation interviews. The utility of the protocol was then evaluated by comparing 55 protocol interviews with 50 prior interviews by the same investigators, matched with respect to characteristics likely to affect the richness of the children's accounts. The comparison was based on an analysis of the investigators' utterance types, distribution, and timing, as well as quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the information produced.
As predicted, protocol interviews contained more open-ended prompts overall as well as before the first option-posing utterance than non-protocol interviews did. More details were obtained using open-ended invitations and fewer were obtained using focused questions in protocol interviews than in non-protocol interviews, although the total number of details elicited did not differ significantly. In both conditions, older children provided more details than younger children did.
The findings confirmed that implementation of professionally recommended practices affected the behavior of interviewers in both the pre-substantive and substantive phases of their interviews and enhanced the quality (i.e., likely accuracy) of information elicited from alleged victims.
This research focuses on how lineup administrators influence eyewitnesses' postidentification confidence. What happens to witness confidence when a witness makes an identification that confirms the lineup administrator's expectations; what happens when this expectation is not confirmed? In Experiment 1, participant interviewers (n = 52) administered target-absent photo lineups to participant witnesses (n = 52). The interviewers did not view the simulated crime, but were told the thief's position in the lineup. In every instance this information was false (we used a target-absent lineup). A one-way ANOVA revealed that eyewitness identification confidence was malleable as a function of interviewers' beliefs about the thief's identity. In Experiment 2, participant jurors (n = 80) viewed 40 testimonies of Experiment 1 witnesses (2 participants viewed each testimony). Participant jurors judged all participant witnesses as equally credible despite their varying levels of postidentification confidence.
Inaccuracies in eyewitness accounts can occur when witnesses are exposed to post-event misinformation via discussion with a co-witness. The current study examined the role of co-witness relationship by comparing the memory performance of pairs of romantic couples, friends and previously unacquainted strangers with that of individuals. Ninety-six participants viewed an event and then discussed the witnessed event with a stranger, a romantic partner or a friend. One member of each pair saw a theft take place during the witnessed event. Individual group participants did not discuss the witnessed event with anyone. Results indicate that all co-witness dyads produced less accurate recall accounts than participants who did not interact with another witness. However, witnesses who were previously acquainted with their co-witness (either in a friendship or romantic relationship) were significantly more likely to report information obtained from their co-witness that they had not seen themselves. Prior acquaintance also led to an increased number of incorrect attributions of both guilt and innocence.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling concerning suggestive eyewitness identification procedures (Manson v. Braithwaite, 1977, 432 U.S. 98) has not been revisited by the Court in the intervening 30+ years. Meanwhile, scientific studies of eyewitnesses have progressed and DNA exonerations show that mistaken identification is the primary cause of convictions of the innocent. We analyzed the two-inquiry logic in Manson in light of eyewitness science. Several problems are discussed. Ironically, we note that suggestive identification procedures (determined in the first inquiry) boost the eyewitnesses’ standing on three of the five criteria (used in the second inquiry) that are used to decide whether the suggestive procedures were a problem. The net effect undermines safeguards intended by the Court and destroys incentives to avoid suggestive procedures.
Given the crucial role of eyewitness evidence, statements should be obtained as soon as possible after an incident. This is not always achieved due to demands on police resources. Two studies trace the development of a new tool, the Self-Administered Interview (SAI), designed to elicit a comprehensive initial statement. In Study 1, SAI participants reported more correct details than participants who provided a free recall account, and performed at the same level as participants given a Cognitive Interview. In Study 2, participants viewed a simulated crime and half recorded their statement using the SAI. After a delay of 1 week, all participants completed a free recall test. SAI participants recalled more correct details in the delayed recall task than control participants.
Purpose. The relationship between novelty, self-reported affect, and the weapon focus effect was investigated.
Methods. In two experiments, college students watched a videotaped scene in which either: no item, a novel item (celery) or a gun was brandished. The context of the gun presentation (friendly vs. crime) was also manipulated. A forced-choice questionnaire assessed memory for details of the scene, including the ‘perpetrator’. A self-report of affect was also included.
Results. In both experiments, reliably poorer memory for details of the perpetrator's appearance was demonstrated by participants who viewed the scene with the novel item (i.e. the ‘celery’ group). A traditional weapon focus effect was obtained in Expt 2 only.
Conclusions. These data suggest that novelty/salience may be sufficient to produce reliable deleterious memorial consequences in an eyewitness situation, while arguing against the idea that any unique features of a weapon are necessary for the effect. Although self-reports of affect varied between groups in both experiments, there was little relationship between self-reports of affect and memory. It is suggested that the term weapon focus effect may be a misnomer for a more general attentional effect.
Witnesses often experience lengthy delays prior to being interviewed, during which their memories inevitably decay. Video-communication technology – favored by intergovernmental organizations for playing larger roles in judicial processes – might circumvent some of the resourcing problems that can exacerbate such delays. However, whereas video-mediation might facilitate expeditious interviewing, it might also harm rapport-building, make witnesses uncomfortable, and thereby undermine the quality and detail of their reports. Participants viewed a crime film and were interviewed either one day later via video-link, one day later face-to-face, or 1–2 weeks later face-to-face. Video-mediation neither influenced the detail or the accuracy of participants' reports, nor their ratings of the quality of the interviews. However, participants who underwent video-mediated interviews after a short delay gave more accurate, detailed reports than participants who waited longer to be interviewed face-to-face. This study provides initial empirical evidence that video-mediated communication (VMC) could facilitate the expeditious conduct of high-quality investigative interviews.
Psychological science has come to play an increasingly important role in the legal system by informing the court through expert testimony and by shaping public policy. In recent years, psychological research has driven a movement to reform the procedures that police use to obtain eyewitness identification evidence. This reform movement has been based in part on an argument suggesting that recommended procedures reduce the risk of false identifications with little or no reduction in the rate of correct identifications. A review of the empirical literature, however, challenges this no-cost view. With only one exception, changes in eyewitness identification procedures that reduce the risk of false identification of the innocent also reduce the likelihood of correct identification of the guilty. The implication that criminals may escape prosecution as a result of procedures implemented to protect the innocent makes policy decisions far more complicated than they would otherwise be under the no-cost view. These costs (correct identifications lost) and benefits (false identifications avoided) are discussed in terms of probative value and expected utility.
© The Author(s) 2012.
On the first day of April of 2012, an interesting trial took place in Wells County, exactly 103 years after the famous trial described by Wigmore (1909). The defendant, D, was charged with brutally stabbing a homeless man just after midnight on New Year’s Day. Before the police arrived on the crime scene, the perpetrator, rushing to flee the scene, knocked into a witness who had seen the stabbing, Miss Jane Takin. Three weeks after the crime, a detective called Jane and asked her to participate in a procedure to see whether she could identify the perpetrator. Detective Sy M. Taneous (whose friends call him Mel, which is his middle name) constructed a photo lineup using his standard procedure. He selected five foils and put D’s photo in Position #3. After looking over the photos for several minutes, Jane identified D as the criminal. During D’s trial, the prosecution put on their star witness, Jane, who testified that she had picked D out of the photo lineup, and she reaffirmed her identification of him in court. The defense put on an expert witness, a respected psychological scientist who studies eyewitness memory, Professor William S. Devlin (whose friends called him WSD). WSD testified for over an hour, primarily about the problems with the identification procedure. He took issue, in particular, with the fact that Detective Taneous had presented the photos simultaneously and administered the identification procedure being well aware of the identity of the suspect. In an unusual move, the prosecution, during rebuttal, put on a different eyewitness expert to counter WSD’s testimony. Their expert, Professor Cleve Stark, is a well-regarded psychological scientist who specializes in mathematical modeling of eyewitness identification. We obtained a transcript of Dr.Stark’s cross examination by the defense attorney and present portions of it in this commentary.
We hypothesized that both accuracy and confidence in suspect identifications depend, in part, on participants' ability to identify the target, and that both accuracy and confidence therefore tend to be higher under conditions that lead to good memory for the target than under conditions that lead to poor memory for the target. Furthermore, we hypothesized that a substantial correlation between accuracy and confidence will be observed if, because of variations in conditions, there is considerable variability across participants in ability to identify the target. Consistent with these hypotheses, manipulations that affected accuracy also affected confidence in the same direction, and when data were collapsed across conditions, the accuracy-confidence correlation was substantial (mean r = .59).
False sexual abuse allegations have spurred research on suggestibility, on the assumption that leading questions may produce false accusations. Most researchers, however, have not measured the likelihood that those who respond to suggestive questioning will take the next step and make a formal (false) accusation. The present study incorporates both aspects of abuse investigations: suggestibility (i.e., responsiveness to questions in a leading interview) and false accusations (i.e., signing a formal complaint against an innocent suspect). Participants (N = 129) were observed in a laboratory session and then interviewed twice about their experiences by an interviewer who suggested that the laboratory assistant had behaved inappropriately. Although only 17% of the participants were suggestible, 39% agreed to sign the complaint. Suggestible participants were significantly more likely to make a false accusation than were non-suggestible participants. However, because of the low rate of suggestibility, most false accusations were made by non-suggestible participants. Implications for the legal system are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
A review of the theory and research concerning factors affecting persuasion suggested the hypothesis that eyewitness confidence is an important factor in jurors' perceptions of the witness' credibility. Three experiments were conducted using mock jurors to test this hypothesis. Experiment I found that perceptions of credibility varied as a function of witness confidence. Experiment 2 found that perceptions of the accuracy of the witness' description and identification of the suspect varied as a function of her expertise, whereas perceptions of the accuracy of her account of the crime varied as a function of her confidence. Perceived expertise also varied as a function of witness confidence. Because Experiments 1 and 2 used college students as subjects, Experiment 3 was conducted to replicate these findings in an older subject sample. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
This study investigates the relationship between the number and intensity of negative life events experienced (nNLE and iNLE respectively), neuroticism (N), compliance (C), and interrogative suggestibility on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale 1 (GSS 1). Participants (N=127) completed the GSS1, the Life Events Questionnaire, and the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised. Results show that nNLE correlates significantly with both Yield 1 and Yield 2. Blended models including iNLE and N as independent variables, C as the mediator, and GSS scores as dependent variables provide the most acceptable accounts of GSS scores. The models demonstrate that: (i) the effects of iNLE, N and C on Yield 1 are not statistically significant, (ii) iNLE (but not N or C) exerts a significant and positive direct effect on Yield 2, and (iii) iNLE, N and C exert significant and positive direct effects on shift scores. Findings suggest that answer-shifting on the GSS may result from a negative mindset within interviewees, a desire to alleviate distress, and from compliant tendencies in response to feelings of uncertainty and expectations of success. They further imply that false confessions, in interviewees reporting iNLEs, could also result from compliance with interviewer-pressure or negative feedback during questioning.
The objective of this study was to obtain a quantitative measure of the discussion behaviour of real eyewitnesses. Undergraduate psychology students were given a questionnaire to determine if they had witnessed a serious event. Results from the questionnaire showed that the majority of respondents had witnessed a serious event at some point in their lives, and the majority of witnesses were not alone when they observed the event. Respondents who had experienced a serious event for which there was more than one witness present were invited to fill out a follow-up questionnaire. The follow-up study showed that when there is a co-witness present, most people (86%) report discussing the event with the co-witness. This is potentially problematic if the witnesses are contaminating one another's memories of the event. The results are discussed in terms of psychological research and policy implications.
A total of 490 subjects, in four experiments, saw films of complex, fast-moving events, such as automobile accidents or classroom disruptions. The purpose of these experiments was to investigate how the wording of questions asked immediately after an event may influence responses to questions asked considerably later. It is shown that when the initial question contains either true presuppositions (e.g., it postulates the existence of an object that did exist in the scene) or false presuppositions (e.g., postulates the existence of an object that did not exist), the likelihood is increased that subjects will later report having seen the presupposed object. The results suggest that questions asked immediately after an event can introduce new-not necessarily correct-information, which is then added to the memorial representation of the event, thereby causing its reconstruction or alteration.
We examined how certain personality traits might relate to the formation of suggestive memory over time. We hypothesised that compliance and trust relate to initial acceptance of misinformation as memory, whereas fantasy proneness might relate to integration of misinformation into memory after later intervals (relative to the time of exposure to misinformation). Participants watched an excerpt from a movie-the simulated eyewitness event. They next answered a recall test that included embedded misinformation about the movie. Participants then answered a yes/no recognition test. A week later, participants answered a second yes/no recognition test about the movie (each yes/no recognition test included different questions). Before both recognition tests, participants were warned about the misinformation shown during recall and were asked to base their answer on the movie excerpt only. After completing the second recognition test, participants answered questions from the Neuroticism Extroversion Openness Personality Inventory-3 (McCrae, Costa, & Martin, 2005) and Creative Experiences Questionnaire (Merckelbach, Horselenberg, & Muris, 2001). While compliance correlated with misinformation effects immediately after exposure to misinformation, fantasy-prone personality accounted for more of the variability in false recognition rates than compliance after a 1-week interval.
The influence of the degree of detail of eyewitness testimony on two sides of a court case was investigated in two experiments. In the first experiment subject-jurors read a civil court case involving an automobile-pedestrian accident. The plaintiff and the defendant presented conflicting eyewitness accounts. Judgments of the relative credibility of the eyewitnesses on each side and the percentage of negligence of the parties were influenced by the relative degree of detail of the eyewitness testimony on each side. In the second experiment subject-jurors read a criminal court case involving robbery and murder. The prosecution and defense presented conflicting eyewitness accounts. The degree of detail of the prosecution eyewitness testimony influenced judgments of guilt and judgments of the credibility of the eyewitnesses. An examination of the reasons for verdicts and credibility judgments revealed that some subjects inferred that an eyewitness who gave testimony with a greater degree of detail had a better memory for the trivial details and the culprit than an eyewitness who gave testimony with a lesser degree of detail. Implications of these results for the legal system are discussed.
The current investigative interviewing model for police officers in England and Wales recommends the use of the cognitive interview (CI). However, there is much to suggest that police officers do not regularly fully apply the procedure and that when they do, it is often poorly applied. Research has indicated that this is particularly the case with non-specialist police investigators who believe the CI is too cumbersome, complex and time consuming for the types of witness interviews they conduct. With this in mind the present study investigated a CI procedure that had been substantially modified in an attempt to enhance its forensic practicability while retaining the demonstrated superiority of the CI. Employing the mock witness paradigm, the modified procedure was compared to both the current CI model and a structured interview (SI). Results revealed that the modified CI was more effective than the SI, while being as effective as the current CI, despite being significantly shorter in duration and, we argue, less demanding for the interviewer. Hence, the proposed modified CI may well be an effective practical alternative for frontline investigators. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
When attempting to identify an offender whom they saw commit a crime, eyewitnesses are frequently asked to indicate their confidence in their memories. Confidence judgments may be expressed prior to seeing a line-up, after making an identification decision or in the courtroom. Such judgments can exert an important influence on decision making within the criminal justice system. Here, I examine theory and evidence that bear on the likely usefulness of such confidence judgments for diagnosing the accuracy of the associated identification. Contrary to often expressed views, I argue that confidence recorded immediately after the identification test is informative about the identity of the offender. Confidence expressions obtained at other times are likely to be misleading. Important directions for future confidence research are identified.
Major investigative interviewing protocols such as the Cognitive Interview recommend that investigators build rapport with cooperative adult witnesses at the beginning of a police interview. Although research substantiates the benefits of rapport-building on the accuracy of child witness reports, few studies have examined whether similar benefits apply to adult witnesses. The present study investigated whether verbal rapport-building techniques increase adult witness report accuracy and decrease their susceptibility to post-event misinformation. One-hundred eleven college adults viewed a videotaped mock-crime, received post-event misinformation (or correct information) about the crime, and were subsequently interviewed by a research assistant who built rapport (or did not build rapport) before recalling the mock-crime. Results indicated that rapport-building increased the quality of witness recall by decreasing the percentage of inaccurate and misinformation reported, particularly in response to open-ended questions. We discuss implications and recommendations for law enforcement. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Purpose. The primary objectives of the study reported here were twofold. First, to investigate less experienced frontline police officers' perceptions of their witness interviewing practices with specific reference to their use of the ten cognitive interview components taught during initial PEACE (a mnemonic for the stages of the interview; Planning and preparation, Engage and explain, Account, Closure and Evaluation) interview training. Second, to investigate this group of officers' practical experiences of interviewing witnesses.
Method. A sample of 221 young, in‐service, non‐specialist police officers from five UK police forces completed a self‐report questionnaire concerning their perceived witness interviewing practices. Respondents were surveyed about their use of the PEACE cognitive interview components, their practical experiences of interviewing witnesses and victims, and their views on investigative interviewing training.
Results. There was a consensus among these officers that they perceived using some of the PEACE cognitive interview components more frequently and perceived some of them to be more effective than others.
Conclusion. This study provides a unique insight into the perceived interviewing practices of some of the least experienced and the least trained investigative interviewers who conduct the majority of frontline witness interviews. These officers report feeling inadequately trained, under pressure and generally ill equipped to conduct a PEACE cognitive interview.
This study has several aims. First, to validate the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GSS) among delinquent and adolescent boys placed in an assessment and short-term treatment centre. Second, to test the hypothesis that adolescent boys are particularly susceptible to suggestions when they are ‘pressured’ by negative feedback and instructions. Finally, to investigate the hypothesis that suggestibility is related to memory recall and self-esteem. The GSS was administered to 31 boys (ages 11 to 16 yr) who had been independently rated by two teachers on measures of suggestibility and self-esteem. Suggestibility as measured by the GSS was found to correlate significantly with the teachers' ratings of suggestibility, supporting empirically the criterion-related validity of the GSS. Compared with young ‘normal’ adults the boys were no more likely to give in to suggestive questions than the adults, unless their performance was subjected to criticism and negative feedback. The results suggest that deliquent adolescents may be particularly responsive to interpersonal pressure during interrogation. The findings have important implications for police interrogation procedures.
People remember different details about the same events, and when they discuss events they exchange new - and misleading - information. Discussion can change memory, especially when the source of new information is highly credible. But we do not know whether the effects of credibility are based on absolute judgments - judging a source's credibility independently from our own credibility - or relative judgments - judging a source's credibility only in relation to our own credibility. We addressed this question by manipulating subjects' expectations, leading them to believe that they either had the same, higher or lower "visual acuity" than their partner while they watched a movie together. To create ample opportunities for the pairs to mention misleading details to one another, each member unknowingly saw a different version of the movie. The pairs then discussed some of the critical differences, but not others. Later, everyone took an independent recognition test. Subjects' susceptibility to misinformation depended on their own credibility relative to their partner's, supporting the idea that susceptibility to misinformation depends on relative differences in credibility.
Confident witnesses are deemed more credible than unconfident ones, and accurate witnesses are deemed more credible than inaccurate ones. But are those effects independent? Two experiments show that errors in testimony damage the overall credibility of witnesses who were confident about the erroneous testimony more than that of witnesses who were not confident about it. Furthermore, after making an error, less confident witnesses may appear more credible than more confident ones. Our interpretation of these results is that people make inferences about source calibration when evaluating testimony and other social communication.
Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, and Guidance on Using Special Measures
- Ministry Of Justice
Ministry of Justice, 2011. Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance
on Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, and Guidance on Using Special Measures.
Retrieved from: www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/best_evidence_in_criminal_
proceedings.pdf.
Applied Research from Routine Monitoring to Evidence-Based Practices; Episodic Memory; False Memories
- Criminal Crime
- Justice
also: Crime and Criminal Justice: Applied Research from
Routine Monitoring to Evidence-Based Practices; Episodic
Memory; False Memories; Injustice: Legal Aspects; Juries;