scholarly journals Ordered Questions Bias Eyewitnesses and Jurors

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Robert Michael

<p>Eyewitnesses play an important role in the justice system. But suggestive questioning can distort eyewitness memory and confidence, and those distorted beliefs influence jurors (Loftus, 2005; Penrod & Cutler, 1995). Recent research, however, hints that suggestion is not necessary. Simply changing the order of a set of trivia questions altered people's beliefs about their accuracy on those questions (Weinstein & Roediger, 2010, 2012). I wondered to what degree eyewitnesses' beliefs—and in turn the jurors who evaluate them—would be affected by this simple change to the order in which they answer questions. Across a number of experiments in Part 1 of my thesis, I show that the order of questions matters: Eyewitnesses reported higher accuracy and were more confident about their memory when questions seemed initially easy than when they seemed initially difficult. In addition, jurors' beliefs about eyewitnesses closely matched those of the eyewitnesses themselves. But why does the order of questions matter? How does this simple rearrangement produce these alarming effects? Across a number of experiments in Part 2 of my thesis, I explore the extent to which the data are consistent with an explanation where eyewitnesses rapidly form an impression of their performance that is resistant to change. Taken together, these findings have implications for eyewitness metacognition and for eyewitness questioning procedures.</p>

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Robert Michael

<p>Eyewitnesses play an important role in the justice system. But suggestive questioning can distort eyewitness memory and confidence, and those distorted beliefs influence jurors (Loftus, 2005; Penrod & Cutler, 1995). Recent research, however, hints that suggestion is not necessary. Simply changing the order of a set of trivia questions altered people's beliefs about their accuracy on those questions (Weinstein & Roediger, 2010, 2012). I wondered to what degree eyewitnesses' beliefs—and in turn the jurors who evaluate them—would be affected by this simple change to the order in which they answer questions. Across a number of experiments in Part 1 of my thesis, I show that the order of questions matters: Eyewitnesses reported higher accuracy and were more confident about their memory when questions seemed initially easy than when they seemed initially difficult. In addition, jurors' beliefs about eyewitnesses closely matched those of the eyewitnesses themselves. But why does the order of questions matter? How does this simple rearrangement produce these alarming effects? Across a number of experiments in Part 2 of my thesis, I explore the extent to which the data are consistent with an explanation where eyewitnesses rapidly form an impression of their performance that is resistant to change. Taken together, these findings have implications for eyewitness metacognition and for eyewitness questioning procedures.</p>


Author(s):  
Joanna Pozzulo

This chapter examines the role of estimator variables within eyewitness memory. Estimator variables are factors that occur during the time of the crime that may affect eyewitness identification accuracy. Various estimator variables are discussed, in conjunction with familiarity, to highlight how eyewitness recall and identification may be impacted. The chapter first discusses witness variables such as the role of the eyewitness (i.e., whether the witness is a bystander or a victim), the role of arousal during the time of the crime, the age of the witness, the cross-race effect, and personality variables that may impact identification accuracy. The chapter then discusses the challenges the criminal justice system faces when determining the impact of estimator variables on eyewitness identification accuracy and the need to consider these variables in conjunction with familiarity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document