Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases.
- 1 March 1988
- journal article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Law and Human Behavior
- Vol. 12 (1) , 41-55
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01064273
Abstract
The lay-person's knowledge of the factors that influence eyewitness memory was examined by evaluating the manner in which mock jurors integrated eyewitness evidence to draw inferences about defendant culpability and the likelihood that an identification was correct. Three hundred and twenty-one undergraduates viewed a videotaped trial within which ten witness and identification factors were manipulated between trials. Manipulation checks showed that subjects demonstrated superior memory for the evidence and the manipulated variables had their intended impact on appropriate rating scales. However, only one variable, witness confidence, had reliable effects on subjects' perceptions of culpability, on the perceived likelihood that the identification was correct, and on several other relevant dependent variables. Eight variables that have been shown to affect identification accuracy in the empirical literature had trivial effects on mock jurors' inferences. It was concluded that lay-people are insensitive to the factors that influence eyewitness memory.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables.Law and Human Behavior, 1987
- Courtroom testimony by psychologists on eyewitness identification issues: Critical notes and reflections.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- Expert psychological testimony: Empirical and conceptual analyses of effects.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- Experimental psychologist as advocate or impartial educator.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- Legal principles governing expert testimony by experimental psychologists.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- Cognitive psychologists as expert witnesses: A problem in professional ethics.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- The experimental psychologist in court: The ethics of expert testimony.Law and Human Behavior, 1986
- Silence is not golden.American Psychologist, 1983
- Do jurors share a common understanding concerning eyewitness behavior?Law and Human Behavior, 1982
- The tractability of eyewitness confidence and its implications for triers of fact.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1981