Test a Witness's Memory of a Suspect Only Once.

John T Wixted, Gary L Wells, Elizabeth F Loftus, Brandon L Garrett
{"title":"Test a Witness's Memory of a Suspect Only Once.","authors":"John T Wixted,&nbsp;Gary L Wells,&nbsp;Elizabeth F Loftus,&nbsp;Brandon L Garrett","doi":"10.1177/15291006211026259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Eyewitness misidentifications are almost always made with high confidence in the courtroom. The courtroom is where eyewitnesses make their <i>last</i> identification of defendants suspected of (and charged with) committing a crime. But what did those same eyewitnesses do on the <i>first</i> identification test, conducted early in a police investigation? Despite testifying with high confidence in court, many eyewitnesses also testified that they had initially identified the suspect with low confidence or failed to identify the suspect at all. Presenting a lineup leaves the eyewitness with a memory trace of the faces in the lineup, including that of the suspect. As a result, the memory signal generated by the face of that suspect will be stronger on a later test involving the same witness, even if the suspect is innocent. In that sense, testing memory contaminates memory. These considerations underscore the importance of a newly proposed recommendation for conducting eyewitness identifications: <i>Avoid repeated identification procedures with the same witness and suspect</i>. This recommendation applies not only to additional tests conducted by police investigators but also to the final test conducted in the courtroom, in front of the judge and jury.</p>","PeriodicalId":37882,"journal":{"name":"Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15291006211026259","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Eyewitness misidentifications are almost always made with high confidence in the courtroom. The courtroom is where eyewitnesses make their last identification of defendants suspected of (and charged with) committing a crime. But what did those same eyewitnesses do on the first identification test, conducted early in a police investigation? Despite testifying with high confidence in court, many eyewitnesses also testified that they had initially identified the suspect with low confidence or failed to identify the suspect at all. Presenting a lineup leaves the eyewitness with a memory trace of the faces in the lineup, including that of the suspect. As a result, the memory signal generated by the face of that suspect will be stronger on a later test involving the same witness, even if the suspect is innocent. In that sense, testing memory contaminates memory. These considerations underscore the importance of a newly proposed recommendation for conducting eyewitness identifications: Avoid repeated identification procedures with the same witness and suspect. This recommendation applies not only to additional tests conducted by police investigators but also to the final test conducted in the courtroom, in front of the judge and jury.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
只测试一次证人对嫌疑犯的记忆。
在法庭上,目击者的错误指认几乎总是充满信心的。法庭是目击证人对涉嫌(或被控)犯罪的被告进行最后鉴定的地方。但是,在警方调查的早期进行的第一次鉴定测试中,这些目击者做了什么?尽管在法庭上的证词可信度很高,但许多目击者也作证说,他们最初指认嫌疑人的可信度很低,或者根本没有指认出嫌疑人。指认指认会让目击者对指认中的人留下记忆痕迹,包括嫌疑人的脸。因此,在随后涉及同一证人的测试中,即使嫌疑人是无辜的,由该嫌疑人的脸产生的记忆信号也会更强。从这个意义上说,测试内存会污染内存。这些考虑强调了一项新近提出的关于进行目击者辨认的建议的重要性:避免对同一证人和嫌疑人进行重复辨认程序。这项建议不仅适用于警察调查人员进行的额外测试,也适用于在法庭上、在法官和陪审团面前进行的最后测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
68.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Psychological Science in the Public Interest (PSPI) is a unique journal featuring comprehensive and compelling reviews of issues that are of direct relevance to the general public. These reviews are written by blue ribbon teams of specialists representing a range of viewpoints, and are intended to assess the current state-of-the-science with regard to the topic. Among other things, PSPI reports have challenged the validity of the Rorschach and other projective tests; have explored how to keep the aging brain sharp; and have documented problems with the current state of clinical psychology. PSPI reports are regularly featured in Scientific American Mind and are typically covered in a variety of other major media outlets.
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to "The Heterogeneous Nature of Substance Use and Substance Use Disorders: Implications for Characterizing Substance-Related Stigma". Comment on Porat et al. (2024): "Preventing Sexual Violence: A Behavioral Problem Without a Behaviorally Informed Solution". Preventing Sexual Violence: A Behavioral Problem Without a Behaviorally Informed Solution. Addressing Challenges and Opportunities in Juvenile Justice: Meeting the Needs of Incarcerated Adolescent Populations. Adolescent Contact, Lasting Impact? Lessons Learned From Two Longitudinal Studies Spanning 20 Years of Developmental Science Research With Justice-System-Involved Youths.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1