Eyewitness Testimony and Identification

Eyewitness and Ear Witness Testimonies

Types of Recall Protocols

• Cognitive Interview: A method designed to improve the accuracy of witness recall.
• Modified Cognitive Interviews: Adjustments made to the standard cognitive interview to enhance usability and efficiency.

Memory Effects

• Reconsolidation: Each time an individual discusses an event, it can lead to the formation of new memories related to that event, which might alter the original memory.
• Spreading Activation: Information in the brain is stored in an interconnected manner. For instance, the neurons associated with "doctor" and "medicine" are closely linked. When one neuron fires, it can activate adjacent ones, impacting recall.
• Recall vs. Recognition: Typically, recall (retrieving information without cues) is more challenging than recognition (identifying previously learned information).

The McGurk Effect

• This phenomenon illustrates that visual information can override auditory information. Even when sensory functions stay intact, discrepancies can occur during interpretation as sight often serves as the dominant sense.

Interview Techniques

• Rapport Building: Establishing trust between the interviewer and interviewee can enhance the quality and quantity of information gathered. Casual inquiries about personal aspects (e.g., pets) can facilitate this rapport.
• False Rejection: When a witness identifies someone they recognize but claims they do not recognize their perpetrator.
• Foil Identification: When a witness mistakenly identifies an innocent person as the perpetrator of a crime.

Lineup Presentation Procedures

Biased Lineups

• A biased lineup can lead to unreliable identifications. Factors such as lineup composition (target-present vs. target-absent lineups) influence the accuracy of witness identifications.
• Show-Up: In situations where the suspect is critically injured (e.g., in a hospital), it's often necessary to show the victim only one suspect, typically compromising reliability.

Lineup Positioning

• The placement of the suspect in a lineup is crucial as witnesses may exhibit a tendency to orient their attention towards the left side of the lineup. Stacked lineups (arranging suspects from top to bottom) are one approach to mitigate this tendency.

Instruction Bias

• Phrasing such as “Are you sure? Look again?” can imply doubt about the witness's choice and increase the likelihood of inaccurate selections.

Factors Affecting Identification Accuracy

• Witness confidence does not reliably correlate with accuracy. In many cases, increased confidence can lead to greater inaccuracy.
• Confidence Declines: More opportunities for a witness to express their decision generally leads to greater accuracy.
• Double Blind Lineups: An investigative procedure where neither the officer administering the lineup nor the witness knows the identity of the suspect, minimizing bias and external influence on the witness's decision-making process.

Additional Considerations

• Identifying specific features like face, hair, and clothing are positively correlated with accurate identifications. However, overall confidence in identification should be approached cautiously, as it may not reflect the correct assessment of reliability.