Eyewitness Memory For A Simulated Misdemeanor Crime

Subsequently, a study led by Brewer and Treyens (1981) involved further research into the tie between schemas and visual memory. The experiment supported the theory of schema expectancy – participants, who were placed in a workplace setting, were able to easily recall office supplies as opposed to the more unusual items also left in their vicinity (Brewer & Treyens, 1981). Once again, this leads to the inference that the witness can unconsciously alter recollection of events in eyewitness testimony, and that there is no guarantee of accuracy in their statement (Leinfelt,

While the cognitive interview does prove to be effective in increasing the amount of accurate information elicited from witnesses of crimes, it does not necessarily increase the credibility of eyewitness testimony by reducing memory error and confabulations. The cognitive interview has been shown to elicit more information than the standard interview, but the two types do not differ on incorrect information or confabulations

The study design included a sample of 80 high schools and 52 middle schools with an unequal probability of selection, ensuring representativeness with regard to region of country, urban city, school size, school type, and ethnicity. The sample has been followed through adolescence and early adulthood (with ongoing data collection). More than 20,000 students participated in the first wave of data between years 1994 and 1995.1 Approximately 15,700

However, factors such as interactions with other witnesses and the influence of media outlets cannot be accounted for. In addition, the small sample size of 13 participants means the results are not as reliable and cannot be generalised to the population at large. One possible factor which may influence the results is that witnesses were within close proximity to the events which transpired which can influence memory as well as not being applicable to many crimes whereby the witnesses only see part of the crime or a shadow of the perpetrator. An alternative explanation would be that flashbulb memory was at work here.

The Effect of Hearsay Witness Age in a Child Sexual assault case” from the journal Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, authors Jonathan M. Golding, Mary C Alexander, and Terri L. Stewart discuss how jurors view hearsay witnesses and if the age of the hearsay witness effects their perception of the credibility of hearsay witness. A study was done with male and female participants, who read a fictional court case summary about a sexual assault. The court case summary involved a 7, 16, or 25-year-old hearsay witness testifying on behalf of a 6 or 15-year-old victim. (Golding, Alexander, Stewart, 1999) The case included the testimony of one primary witness, a hearsay witness, or a clinical psychologist. (Golding, Alexander, Stewart, 1999) The authors begin by explaining the purpose of child hearsay testimonies and when hearsay witnesses are permitted, “a child’s words are hearsay if (a) the child’s words were intended by the child to describe something that happened, (b) the child’s words were spoken prior to the court proceeding at which the words are repeated by someone who heard the child speak, and (c) the child’s words are offered in court to prove that what the child said actually happened.” (Golding, Alexander, Stewart, 1999) hearsay isn’t always permitted in order to keep the trail from becoming unfair. The authors discuss different studies that have been done on hearsay testimonies and whether these studies have shown hearsay to be reliable and warranted. One study that is described ended with jurors believing the hearsay witness just as much as the victim testifying on her own behalf, the reasons for this, as the article explains, is “the mock jurors may have seen the hearsay witness as a ‘surrogate who is simply retelling the child’s story’” (Golding, Alexander, Stewart, 1999) second jurors may feel the need to punish someone because sexual assault is seen as such a horrible crime, third the hearsay

Lineup identifications can yield biases through the lineup administrator’s insight and biased instructions which influences an eyewitness’ decision. An administrator’s knowledge refers to their awareness of the suspect's identity during the line-up identification process (Quas, 2017). The advance knowledge can potentially influence the eyewitness to choose a suspect from the lineup even if they are absent. Lindsay et al. (1997) reveal that witnesses tend to identify a lineup member that closely resembles the suspect from their memory. If the eyewitness is aware of the administrator’s advanced knowledge, they can be pressured to identify a suspect. For example, the eyewitness may be inclined to choose a member from the lineup because they

Participants in this study were 119 undergraduate students from a Canadian university. Gender selection was 36 males and 83 women with ages ranging from 18 to 51 years. As an incentive, the Canadian university psychology department awarded the participants with course

“Violence, stress, and the presence of a weapon at the time of a crime all may have detrimental effects on the ability of a witness to make an accurate identification” (Vallas, 2011). Stress distorts an eyewitness’s observations, and while it is understandable to focus on the weapon when faced with a situation in which the eyewitness is in danger, the focus on the weapon is not as important as the description of the perpetrator. Since it is not within the power of researchers studying the effects of violence and stress on witnesses to replicate the exact stress and violence of an actual crime, it has been difficult to determine the actual effect that these two factors have on witnesses (Vallas, 2011). However, many experiments conclude that an increase in the level of violence used in the crime results in a decrease in both the accuracy of the identification as well as the witness’s recall abilities (Vallas, 2011). Weapon focus is described as

The author emphasizes how the actual psychological development of the child and the treatment of various problems that a child may face during development are the two most important things that a child psychologist must be able to handle. The author also touches a lot on the factors of a child’s development and how setting, family, community, and the media all play a huge role in the developmental state of the child. The author also touches on the reality of child psychology in that children are almost never raised in a perfect environment and that there is such a wide array of issues that need to be treated as children progress through childhood and

The average age of the participants was around 18.5 years of age, however, all were under the age of 21. The participants were selected from introductory psychology courses, all of whom received credit with a passing grade. The participants ranged in gender, 82% were Caucasian, 13% were African-American, and the remaining 4% identified as other.

Students enrolled in an advanced psychology class at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee recruited participants. Each student enrolled in the class was required to recruit a minimum of eight participants to complete an online survey. Extra credit was available for recruiting additional participants. A sample of 327 emerging adults between the ages of 18 and 24 (M = 21.82, SD = 1.68) took part in the study. The majority of participants were female (55%). Participants were predominantly Caucasian (77%) but also involved persons whom identified as African-American (9%), Asian (6%), Latina/o (4%), Mixed (3%), Middle Eastern (1%), Native American (1%) and Pacific Islander (1%).

The purpose of this study was to use exposure time and encoding operations, known to influence initial memory strength, to estimate how eyewitness identification capabilities vary under different conditions. This way, estimated variables that are under the control of the justice system can demonstrate how they moderate information needed for the assessment of the crime and eyewitness’s credibility (Bornstein et al.,

Cochran et al (2016) provide a case study analysis of the temporal nature of memory in suspect lineups and crimes being investigated by law enforcement. The study involves a longitudinal evaluation of participants that are given evidence of a crime (through slideshows) that allows them to ascertain the criminal act or to choose a suspect in a lineup. At a later time, the participants are given altered information on the crime, which revealed a greatly distorted memory of the crimes that the participants did not remember. This misinformation was an attempt to trick the participants into affirming

The research method used for this study was a survey distributed as a self-report questionnaire. Data were collected by giving the questionnaire to 3,065 male and female adolescents attending grades 7 through 12 in three midwestern states. The sample design consisted of two parts. First, schools were chosen within a participating school district, which was representative for size and location within the area. Second, two or three classrooms per grade level were chosen among the general enrollment classes. A small subset was also added from applicants who volunteered from the districts who were interviewed a few weeks before the questionnaire was administered (Akers, Lanza-Kaduce, & Radiosevich, 1979).

This study is centered around undergraduate and graduate students between the ages of 18 and 25 years old. The undergraduate and graduate students from psychology and sociology classes at the University of Connecticut are recruited to participate in a self-report survey. A random sample of 240 students will be acquired, 120 males and 120 females. These students will range from different races, ethnicities, and socio-economic background. The participants will first be clustered based on gender, then subcategorized by social class, race, and where these participants originally reside. The clusters will allow researchers to view the differing statistics of each characteristic and hopefully distinguish correlations. One hundred and twenty