Outline and Evaluate Research Into the Effects of Anxiety on the Accuracy of Eye Witness Testimony.

Given these findings, it suggests that if an unfamiliar story can be re-told with significant changes by all those who participated in the study, a statement given by an eyewitness is subject to the same results (Leinfelt, 2004). Having considered Bartlett’s research in 1932, it is also reasonable to consider the criticism of Gauld and Stephenson (1967), as they discovered if the participants were told of the importance of accurate recall, the number of errors made in the re-telling was notably reduced. Arguably, real life cases and laboratory findings have shown that although eyewitnesses understand the importance of accuracy, recall is not without error (Tversky & Tuchin, 1989).

Eyewitness testimony is a hot button issue in not only the criminal justice field but also the psychology field as well. It continues to be argued that this type of “evidence” is far too unreliable for the court room and can ultimately end up punishing the wrong person for a crime they did not commit. The influence of an eyewitness testimony cannot be denied as research has showed that, “adding a single prosecution eyewitness to a murder trial summary increased the percentage of mock jurors’ guilty verdicts from 18 to 72” (Leippe, Manion, & Romanczyk, p. 182, 1992). In the article discussed here, researchers will look into various age groups to see if age has an effect on the credibility of eyewitness testimonies while attempting to discern what certain cues build upon such credibility.

There are many different factors that play a part in the increased chance of a witness correctly identifying a suspect. Such factors should be brought to the attention of the jury and the judge to help in properly assessing whether a witness is correctly identifying a suspect. A study by Magnussen, Melinder, Stridbeck, & Raja (2010) found that of the three different types of people: judge, jury, and general public, that for the most part all where fairly ill-informed on the reliability of eyewitness testimony with judges having the most. Judges only had about an 8% difference in knowledge when compared to jurors. With this information it is very clear that education on the reliability of eyewitness testimony needs to become more of a general knowledge information for the everyone, especially people who are involved in upholding the law. Another factor to look into when evaluating the accuracy eyewitness testimony is the role that memory plays. Memory is divided into three processes: perceiving, remembering, and recalling information (Simmonsen, 2013). There is plenty of room in all three of those stages to forget or falsely remember something. Some factors that play a part when a person perceives an event is the amount of time they are exposed to the event and the suspect. A study conducted by Horry, Halford, Brewer, Milne, & Bull. (2014) found that witnesses were increasingly more likely to correctly identify a suspect if they had been exposed to the suspect for sixty

There are many factors to consider when psychologists and scientists are trying to figure out reliability of eyewitness testimony. The ability to recall or

The impact of eyewitness testimony upon the members of a jury has been the subject of various research projects and has guided the policies formed by the federal government regarding its competent use in criminal matters (Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulero, 2000). Therefore, eyewitness studies are important to understand how

Although eyewitness testimony can be significant when displaying it to a judge or a jury, years of supportive social science research has sustained that eyewitness identification is often unreliable. As the Innocence Project website illustrates, studies show that the human mind is nowhere near like a ‘tape recorder’ and we as humans do not record events exactly as we see them. Instead, witness recollection is just like any other evidence at a crime scene and must be preserved carefully and sensibly retrieved or it can be considered as contaminated.

Despite thorough research supporting the dangers of eyewitness testimony, and the constant press by the American Psychological Association (APA) and different law, psychology, and forensics experts, there are no national guidelines conducting how law enforcement agencies gather eyewitness identifications. In an APA brief, suggested by researchers and the Innocence Project, sent to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, it discussed how juries often don’t understand the factors that can influence a witness’ ability to accurately identify a suspect. Such factors include how much stress a witness is under,

To minimise the impact of a confident eyewitness in a courtroom, Wixted (2015) suggests that a jury needs to be made aware of any hesitation displayed at the time of initial questioning. It seems that An emphasis should be placed on the early stages of an investigation whilst removing the absolute reliance of courtroom testimonies. By educating a jury about the significance of initial non-identification, it would reduce the likelihood of these testemonies from becoming conclusive

After witnessing a crime, eyewitnesses are asked for a testimony to find the culprit. Most of the time these testimonies are highly relied on. However, according to physiological evidence 33% of the time these testimonies are incorrect and cause an innocent victim, like Johnson, to end up in jail for no reason (Simply Psychology). There are many influencing factors as to why an eyewitness may not remember what they witnessed. These factors include stress causing a negative recollection of the crime, poor conditions in which the crime occurred; so what the eyewitness

The cognitive interview increases the credibility of eyewitness testimony by decreasing memory error and confabulations.

In the late 19th-century research on eyewitness, testimony memory began, psychologists had been studying memory, and the findings became useful for forensic psychology and law. A central issue with studying eyewitness memory and testimony is the ecological validity of lab studies. There are relatively few ‘real world’ eyewitness memory studies, and that causes problems for determining the generalizability of findings in eyewitness memory. Coined by Wells (1978) estimator variables are present at the time of a crime and cannot be changed (i.e. witness characteristics and the type of offence) and system variables are factors that can be manipulated to affect eyewitness accuracy (i.e. line-up procedures and interview types). The system variables

“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

Also, an eye witness testimony can shed light into the sequence of the events that took place while the crime was committed. This helps the jury and lawyers better understand everything about the case as the eyewitness testimony explains how the crime was committed, who was involved and where it happened. Eyewitness testimonies are generally reliable. When the testimony is obtained and reported right after the event took place, the witness’ memory is still fresh, which gives a higher chance that their account of the incident is still vivid in their mind. This makes the testimony more reliable.

An Article Review of “Memory blindness: Altered memory reports lead to distortion in eyewitness memory” by Cochran et al. (2016)

Eyewitness testimony is the account of the witness of a certain event or incident. Throughout, the witness is enforced to provide their experience to the court in order to take legal action towards the incident. It is considered a very useful tool in courts. Yet, such a way to find out the truth is unreliable as many witnesses fail to contribute in a positive way to grant courts accurate data of the incident. This essay will be discussing the factors that influence eyewitness testimony including age, weapon focus, stress, or the leading questions asked in court.