This article documents a contradiction between objective eyewitness accuracy and perceived eyewitness accuracy. Objectively, eyewitness identification accuracy (and the confidence-accuracy relationship) is comparably strong when a lineup identification is accompanied by a justification that refers to either an observable feature about the suspect ("I remember his eyes"), an unobservable feature ("He looks like a friend of mine") or just a statement of recognition ("I recognize him"). There is, however, a weaker relationship between confidence and accuracy and an increase in high confidence errors for identifications that are accompanied by references to familiarity than by references to any other type of justification. With respect to perceived accuracy, we document a robust cognitive bias-the featural justification effect-that causes eyewitnesses to be regarded by others as less accurate and less confident when they justify their identification by referring to an observable feature as compared to when they give any other kind of justification, except for a reference to familiarity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xap0000182DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

eyewitness accuracy
12
perceived eyewitness
8
featural justification
8
observable feature
8
accuracy
6
justification
5
actual perceived
4
eyewitness
4
accuracy confidence
4
confidence featural
4

Similar Publications

Individuals are often exposed to information regarding previously witnessed events. The misinformation effect occurs when inaccurate post-event information impairs accuracy on a subsequent test of memory for the original event. The misinformation effect is increased when a test is given prior to exposure to post-event information, a phenomenon termed Retrieval Enhanced Suggestibility (RES).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Over time, memories lose episodic detail and become distorted, a process with serious ramifications for eyewitness identification. What are the processes contributing to such transformations over time? We investigated the roles of post-learning sleep and retrieval practice in memory accuracy and distortion, using a naturalistic story recollection task. Undergraduate students listened to a recording of the "War of the Ghosts," a Native American folktale, and were assigned to either a sleep or wake delay group, and either a retrieval practice or listen-only study condition.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Cognitive and social factors can deteriorate eyewitness identification performance in children and older adults. An identification procedure that mitigates the effect of such factors could be beneficial for child and older adult witnesses. In a field experiment, we mapped identification performance in a large community sample (N = 1239) across the lifespan (ages 6-79 years) for two different identification procedures: classic lineups and reaction time-based Concealed Information Test (RT-CIT).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Is confidence most diagnostic of accuracy when expressed in numbers or when expressed in words? This question bears immense importance in many real-world contexts especially within the confines of eyewitness identification. In an eyewitness identification task, we compared the diagnostic value of numeric confidence across rating scales that varied in grain size (3-point vs. 6-point vs.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Mock Juror Perceptions of Eyewitness Reports Given by Children with Intellectual Disabilities.

J Autism Dev Disord

September 2024

Department of Educational & Counselling Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Previous research suggests that an eyewitness credibility bias can arise when mock jurors are informed of a child's disability diagnosis. The aim of the present study was to examine mock jurors' lie-detection accuracy and credibility perceptions when assessing eyewitness testimonies provided by children diagnosed with an intellectual disability. Adult mock jurors (N = 217; half informed of the child's disability status) read four transcriptions from interviews with children (ages 10 to 15) diagnosed with an intellectual disability before evaluating the credibility and truthfulness of each eyewitness report.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!