Intoxicated eyewitnesses: The effect of a fully balanced placebo design on event memory and metacognitive control

Few studies have examined the impact of alcohol on metacognition for witnessed events. We used a 2 × 2 balanced placebo design, where mock witnesses expected and drank alcohol, did not expect but drank alcohol, did not expect nor drank alcohol, or expected but did not drink alcohol. Participants watched a mock crime in a bar‐lab, followed by free recall and a cued‐recall test with or without the option to reply “don't know” (DK). Intoxicated mock witnesses' free recall was less complete but not less accurate. During cued‐recall, alcohol led to lower accuracy, and reverse placebo participants gave more erroneous and fewer correct responses. Permitting and clarifying DK responses was associated with fewer errors and more correct responses for sober individuals; and intoxicated witnesses were less likely to opt out of erroneous responding to unanswerable questions. Our findings highlight the practical and theoretical importance of examining pharmacological effects of alcohol and expectancies in real‐life settings.     

‘Earwitness’ voice recognition: Factors affecting accuracy and impact on jurors

Two studies were conducted examining voice recognition testimony and its impact on jurors. In the first experiment, subjects listened to a tape recording of a brief sales pitch. After a retention interval of either 0, 7 or 14 days, subjects were unexpectedly asked to pick the salesperson's voice out of a five-voice taped lineup. Retention interval did not have a significant effect on hit rates or false alarms. Accuracy and pre-lineup confidence were not significantly correlated, although accuracy was related to post-lineup willingness to testify. In the second experiment, undergraduate subjects were asked to read a summary of a trial, describing a situation similar to that studied in experiment 1; the independent variables were the presence of an earwitness, the gender and confidence of the earwitness, and the retention interval. Only the presence of an earwitness had a significant main effect upon mock jurors' verdicts. However, there was a significant interaction between witness confidence and witness gender when an earwitness identification was presented.     

Replications and Limitations of a Two-Factor Model of Child Witness Credibility

Two experiments are reported that test the idea that jurors perceive child witnesses in terms of a 2-factor model of credibility with the factors defined as cognitive ability and honesty (Leippe & Romanczyk, 1987; Ross, Millers, & Moran, 1989). In the first experiment, 300 mock jurors watched a realistic videotaped recreation of a sexual abuse trial and rated the credibility of the child witness. Mock jurors perceived the child witness in terms of 2 factors: cognitive ability and honesty. Only honesty predicted verdict. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2 ( N = 300) when only the child's testimony was presented and the perceptions of the child witness were not contaminated by the testimony of the other witnesses in the trial.     

Witnesses appearing live versus on video: effects on observers' perception,veracity assessments and memory

The study is an experiment examining how different presentation modes (live vs. video) affect observers' perception, veracity assessments and memory of witnesses and their statements. Three weeks after seeing a staged accident, six truth telling and six lying witnesses testified about the event. Mock jurors (N = 122) viewed the witnesses' testimony either live or on video and rated their perception of the witnesses' statement and appearance as well as the credibility of the witnesses. Live observers rated the witnesses' appearance in a more positive way and perceived them as being more honest than did video observers. Truth tellers were rated as having to think less hard than liars. Moreover, observers were not better than chance in assessing veracity, regardless of presentation mode. Live observers incorrectly believed they had a better memory of the witnesses' statements than video observers. Observers who had watched truthful statements showed a significantly better memory performance than observers who had watched deceptive statements. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A comfortable witness is a good witness: rapport‐building and susceptibility to misinformation in an investigative mock‐crime interview

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.     

Effect of viewing the interview and identification process on juror perceptions of eyewitness accuracy

This study examined whether showing jurors a video of the witness's initial attempts to describe and identify the perpetrator would facilitate jurors' ability to discriminate between accurate and inaccurate witnesses. Mock jurors observed a simulated trial in which the key witness testified under direct examination and cross‐examination. The jurors saw either the witness's testimony or the witness's testimony plus videotape footage of the earlier police interviews in which the witness described and attempted to identify the perpetrator. Results support the hypothesis: Jurors in the examination‐plus‐video condition discriminated between accurate and inaccurate witnesses better than jurors in the examination‐only condition. We discuss various mechanisms to explain the advantage provided by the video. It is recommended that police officers videotape the line‐up procedure and that jurors be shown this video at trial. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Collusion after a collision: Witnesses' reports of a road accident with and without discussion

In a study of the accuracy of recall of witnesses to a road accident, subjects watched a video recording of a natural scene for a few minutes. Two vehicles collided, and reports from the witnesses were taken using a version of the report form used by officers investigating road accidents in the UK. Witnesses were asked questions about the scene of the accident, about each of the two vehicles, and about the timing of the collision relative to a traffic signal. Does the accuracy of report depend upon the isolation of the witness? The study investigated this question by having some witnesses watch the video recording and complete the questionnaire alone, while other witnesses were encouraged to discuss their perceptions and recollections both while watching the recording and during an interval of a few minutes prior to administration of the questionnaire. All witnesses completed their reports in isolation. As a check on witnesses' expectancies, some of them, both individual and group witnesses, were informed prior to seeing the video recording that they would see a road accident and that they would be asked about it. The ‘uninformed’ witnesses were told to expect questions about the road scene. There was no overall difference between the recall accuracy of individual and group witnesses, but there was an interaction between groups and expectancy. When expecting to see a collision the group witnesses were more accurate than the individuals. Social facilitation in recall was restricted to occasions when the witnesses could anticipate the focus of the questions to be asked.     

In‐court versus out‐of‐court testimonies: Children's experiences and adults' assessments

The study examined the effects of different presentation modes on child witnesses' experiences and adults' perception and assessments of the same witnesses. Child witnesses (N = 108) were interviewed about an event that they had either experienced or imagined. Adult mock jurors (N = 240) watched the children's testimonies live, via two‐way closed‐circuit television (CCTV), or via a pre‐recorded video. The results showed that the live observers perceived the children in more positive terms than did the two‐way CCTV observers, who in turn perceived the children in more positive terms than did the video observers. Briefly, it seems as the more proximal the presentation mode, the more positive the observers' perception. Somewhat in contrast to these results, a significantly smaller proportion of the children who testified on video stated that they were nervous, compared to the children who testified live or via two‐way CCTV. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of alcohol intoxication on witness suggestibility immediately and after a delay

Intoxicated witnesses are common, making it important to understand alcohol's impact on witness accuracy and suggestibility. Participants assigned to an immediate retrieval condition encoded and recalled in one of the three intoxication conditions: sober control, placebo, or intoxicated. Participants in the delayed retrieval condition were assigned to encode in one of the three intoxication conditions, returned a week later, and were assigned to retrieve in one of the three intoxication conditions. Intoxication condition at encoding was fully crossed with intoxication condition at retrieval in the delayed condition. Participants encoded a mock crime video and retrieved via a forced‐choice test, with answers already circled (purportedly by a prior participant); half of the precircled responses were incorrect. When recalling after a delay only, intoxication at encoding increased agreement with incorrect suggested answers and decreased accuracy. Results suggest intoxicated witnesses may benefit from being interviewed immediately rather than after a sobering delay.     

Rapport-building: Chat versus in-person witness interviews

Tactics recommended for rapport-building consist of verbal (e.g., finding common ground or shared experiences) and non-verbal (e.g., affirmations, displaying empathy) behaviours. Most of the research on rapport, however, has examined it in in-person contexts, where both verbal and non-verbal behaviours are present. In this study, we were interested in the effectiveness of rapport-building when conducting online witness interviews via chat, which de-emphasises the use non-verbal rapport behaviours, compared to traditional in-person interviews. Participants (N = 131) experienced a virtual reality (VR) scenario depicting a mock crime and were interviewed either in person or online via the chat function in Skype. Participants perceived rapport more positively when interviewed in person for three measures: attentiveness, trust and respect and expertise. Two other measures, cultural similarity and connected flow, were not perceived differently across interview medium. Participants interviewed online via chat disclosed similar amounts of crime-related information and were just as accurate as participants interviewed in person. We found that in-person interviews yielded better rapport ratings than interviews via chat but were equally productive in terms of the quality of information obtained, as measured by crime-related details and accuracy. If witnesses are to be interviewed via chat, investigators must carefully consider how to compensate for the lack of those non-verbal rapport tactics that influence witnesses' perceptions of attentiveness, trust/respect and investigator's expertise.     

Effects of Prejudicial Pretrial Publicity From Physical and Witness Evidence on Mock Jurors' Decision Making1

The effects of prejudicial pretrial publicity (PTP) from physical and witness evidence on decisions made by trained and untrained mock jurors were compared. Mock jurors viewed a videotaped rape trial and participated in jury deliberations. Training consisted of completion of a university course on psychology and law. As expected, physical evidence PTP produced more guilty votes than witness or no PTP. Both types of PTP influenced untrained mock jurors' punishment preferences and perceptions of satisfaction and fairness, whereas trained mock jurors' opinions on these measures were unaffected by PTP. Deliberations of trained mock juries were more task‐oriented and focused on relevant evidence and legal issues than that of their untrained peers. Limitations of this mock jury study were discussed.     

Susceptibility to postidentification feedback is affected by source credibility

How much a person is affected by postidentification feedback is dependent on the credibility of the person giving the feedback. Seven hundred and ninety participants across three experiments viewed a crime video, made judgments from a line‐up, were provided with co‐witness and/or outcome feedback (from police officers [high credibility] or children [low credibility]), and answered testimony‐relevant questions (e.g. How good a view did you get of the person in the video?). The aim was to find out how high versus low credibility co‐witness feedback affects a witness' retrospective judgments (Experiment 1) as well as estimations of these co‐witnesses' judgments (Experiment 2). Experiment 1 showed that the feedback effect was only observed when the co‐witness responses were attributed to a high credibility source. Experiment 2 showed that high credibility co‐witnesses were estimated to score higher on the testimony‐relevant questions as compared to low credibility co‐witnesses. Experiment 3 showed that outcome feedback (e.g. ‘you identified the suspect’) produces stronger effects on testimony‐relevant questions than co‐witness feedback. The implications of these findings are that when postidentification feedback is present, it is important to determine the source of this feedback. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of biased lineup instructions on eyewitness identification confidence

Although it is well‐known that biased lineup instructions (i.e., those that do not inform witnesses the perpetrator may not be in the lineup) inflate false identifications, their effects on witness confidence are less well understood due to methodological limitations of past studies. We report two studies that use novel methodologies to obviate these limitations. Study 1 (N = 177) demonstrated that biased lineup instructions increased witnesses' average estimates of the likelihood that a lineup member is guilty. Study 2 (N = 137) introduces a novel debiasing paradigm that allows a parsing of choosers into those who made an identification only because of the biased instructions (induced choosers), and those who would have chosen despite the instructions (inherent choosers). Biased lineup instructions inflated confidence only among induced choosers, but not among inherent choosers. Contrary to legal reasoning, witness confidence is an insufficient metric to determine the suggestiveness of biased instructions.     

The accuracy-confidence correlation in eyewitness testimony: limits and extensions of the retrospective self-awareness effect.

This research extended Kassin's (1985) finding that retrospective self-awareness (RSA) increases the correlation between eyewitness accuracy and confidence. In Experiment 1, 91 mock witnesses saw a crime, answered questions, made an identification decision, and rated their confidence. RSA increased the accuracy-confidence correlation for witnesses who made an identification and for those who were high but not low in public self-consciousness. A 2nd experiment varied accountability and revealed that high accountability increased the accuracy-confidence correlation but that the RSA effect occurred even under low-accountability conditions. In both studies, observers could not distinguish between accurate and inaccurate witnesses. Together, these findings define the limits of the RSA effect and provide mixed support for a self-perception account of this effect.     

An Aiibi Witness' Influence on Mock Jurors' Verdicts1

The impact of alibi testimony on juror decision making is not yet clear because it has been examined empirically infrequently. This study was designed to determine the impact of alibi witness' testimony, the impact of an alibi witness with a relationship in comparison to one without a relationship to the defendant, and the impact of an eyewitness' confidence on juror decision making. Results indicated that mock jurors acquit a defendant more often when an alibi witness with no relationship to the defendant testified on his behalf. Participants did not believe an alibi witness who had a relationship with the defendant even though the witness was not a family member. Implications for these results are discussed.     

Post‐identification feedback,confidence and recollections of witnessing conditions in child witnesses

Eyewitness confidence and detailed memory reports are often considered reliable indicators of the credibility of the eyewitness testimony. This study investigated how feedback concerning the accuracy of a lineup identification influences witnesses' confidence in the accuracy of their identification decision and their judgements concerning the witnessing experience. Fifty‐seven children (11–12 years) and 55 adults (17–39 years) viewed a video of a robbery and attempted to identify the culprit from a photo lineup. The culprit was not present. Participants received confirming feedback, disconfirming feedback, or no feedback on the accuracy of their identification. The confidence judgements and recollections of witnessing conditions of both children and adults were influenced by confirming and in some instances, disconfirming feedback. These findings imply that confidence and memory reports are easily distorted by non‐specific feedback and investigators should be sensitive to this particularly when dealing with vulnerable witnesses such as children. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.