Chapter 5 Eyewitness Testimony

Chapter 5 Eyewitness Testimony

Learning Objectives

• LO 1: Understand the components of eyewitness memory.

• LO 2: Describe two categories of independent variables and three dependent variables found in eyewitness research.

• LO 3: Describe recall memory in an eyewitness context.

• LO 4: Describe lineup procedures and how they may be biased.

• LO 5: Summarize the debate surrounding expert testimony on eyewitness issues.

• LO 6: Outline the recommendations for collecting eyewitness identification evidence.

Case Study of Eyewitness Testimony

• Amanda Ryder goes to a coffee house and witnesses a robbery.

• After six months, she identifies the thief from a police lineup, stating, "That’s him, I’m certain."

• Eyewitness evidence is significant in forensic psychology and legal proceedings, with historical references to Albert von Schrenck-Notzing's testimony.

Eyewitness Testimony: The Role of Memory

Components of Eyewitness Memory (LO 1)

• Eyewitness testimony depends heavily on memory.

• Memory involves several stages:

  • Encoding Stage: Initial perception and attention (e.g., noticing a stranger's features).

  • Short-Term Memory: Holds limited information temporarily.

  • Long-Term Memory: Stores information for future retrieval.

• Not all details are encoded; factors affecting memory include attention, suggestive questioning by police, and time elapsed before memory retrieval.

Stages of Memory

• Stages:

  1. Perception/Attention: I see an unfamiliar male; noticing features like a round face and bushy eyebrows.

  2. Encoding: Information encoded as description characteristics.

  3. Short-Term Memory: Brief retention of encoded information.

  4. Long-Term Memory: Information available for future recall.

  5. Retrieval: Responding to questions about the appearance of the stranger.

• Figure 5.1: Illustrate memory stages - perception, encoding, short-term and long-term memory, retrieval.

Myths About Eyewitness Memory

• Box 5.1: Myths and Realities

  • Myth 1: Memory is like a videotape.

  • Fact: Memories can change with influences such as subsequent interviews.

  • Myth 2: Question wording doesn't affect responses.

  • Fact: Even minor wording changes can lead to inaccurate memories.

  • Myth 3: Greater stress enhances memory.

  • Fact: High stress typically hampers memory detail.

  • Myth 4: Race of witness/perpetrator has no impact.

  • Fact: Witnesses recognize same-race individuals better (cross-race effect).

  • Myth 5: Weapons do not impact memory.

  • Fact: Presence of a weapon may lead to weapon focus, diminishing memory for other details.

Eyewitness Memory Types

Recall vs. Recognition Memory

• Recall Memory: Reporting details of a previously witnessed event (e.g., describing a perpetrator).

• Recognition Memory: Identifying previously seen items or individuals (e.g., recognizing a voice).

Studying Eyewitness Issues (LO 2)

Research Methods

• Utilize archival data or naturalistic witness interviews post-crime.

• Common methodology includes laboratory simulations where participants unwittingly witness a simulated crime.

Independent Variables

• Estimator Variables: Factors at the time of crime (e.g., witness age, lighting).

• System Variables: Factors manipulated by the criminal justice system to enhance accuracy (e.g., interview procedures).

Dependent Variables

1. Recall of the event/crime.

2. Recall of the perpetrator.

3. Recognition of the perpetrator.

Recall of the Event

• Methodologies in retrieval are crucial; police often use varied tactics leading to varying results in eyewitness memory accuracy (open-ended recall, specific questioning).

Interviewing Eyewitnesses

Common Interview Techniques

• Officers often interrupt eyewitnesses and use closed-question formats, which can hinder comprehensive information retrieval.

• Memory Conformity: Witnesses can influence each other's reports, adversely affecting independent recollection.

Leading Questions and Misinformation Effect

• Elizabeth Loftus's Research: The wording of questions can alter memories.

• The Misinformation Effect: Exposure to inaccurate information can lead witnesses to misremember.

  • Origin: Witness may accept plausible misinformation during questioning.

  • Various explanations: Guessing, source misattribution, or memory impairment.

Procedures to Improve Eyewitness Accuracy

Hypnosis

• Can retrieve greater amounts of information, although potential inaccuracies arise alongside increased recall.

The Cognitive Interview

• Developed to enhance recall by:

  1. Reinstating the context of the event.

  2. Reporting everything.

  3. Reversing the order of event recall.

  4. Changing perspectives.

  • Enhanced Cognitive Interview: Adds social dynamics techniques including rapport building and focused retrieval strategies.

Lineup Procedures (LO 4)

Types of Lineups

• Live lineups, photo arrays, and voice identification.

Identification Accuracy

• Presentation methods can bias identification. For example, simultaneous vs. sequential settings.

Lineup Bias

• Foil Bias: The suspect matches only the suspect description, causing confusion.

• Clothing Bias: Unique clothing worn by the suspect leading to identification errors.

• Instruction Bias: The way officers present the lineup can skew witness decisions, leading to false identifications.

Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Issues (LO 5)

Debates on Reliability

• Eyewitness research reliability is contested, focusing on the applicability of laboratory findings to real-world scenarios.

Validity and Generalizability Issues

• Critics point to variability in eyewitness research results and the influence of participant demographics.

Expert Consensus

• Certain aspects deemed reliable enough for expert testimony include lineup and interview procedures and the confidence-accuracy relationship.

Recommendations for Collecting Eyewitness Evidence (LO 6)

Guidelines Proposed by U.S. Attorney General

1. Lineup conductors should be unaware of the identification suspect.

2. Clear communication regarding the suspect's potential absence from lineups.

3. Ensure suspects do not stand out based on description or other factors.

4. Confidence statements should be recorded before any feedback is given.

5. Video recording of the identification processes recommended to safeguard procedural integrity.

Canadian Context

• Procedures align with U.S. guidelines; significant case examples like R. v. Sophonow further critique eyewitness testimony.

Table 5.2: Notable DNA Exoneration Cases.

1. Eyewitness variables are categorized as either estimator or system variables, affecting testimonial integrity.

2. The misinformation effect complicates reliability in eyewitness accounts, influenced by inaccurate post-event information.

3. The cognitive interview promotes better eyewitness recall through strategic questioning techniques.

4. Recognition procedures varying in format can inadvertently introduce bias into eyewitness identifications.

5. The debate surrounding expert eyewitness testimony remains unresolved; reliability of laboratories to address real incidents is a point of contention.

6. Essential guidelines for compiling eyewitness evidence aim to reduce the risk of wrongful identification; however, actual practice can vary significantly from theoretical recommendations.