Applied Cognitive Psychology最新文献

In four experiments, we investigated how stress influenced the perceived verbal and nonverbal behaviors of honest and deceptive senders and how it affected credibility judgments made by independent observers. We used the Maastricht Acute Stress Test to induce stress in senders. Independent observers evaluated videos (Experiments 1 and 3) or transcripts (Experiments 2 and 4) of these senders reporting honestly or deceptively. Our results showed that stress significantly influenced observers' judgments of nonverbal behaviors but had a limited effect on content evaluations (plausibility, believability, and accuracy). Instead, veracity predominantly shaped credibility assessments, with plausibility and believability emerging as indicators of truthfulness. The findings challenge the reliance on nonverbal cues in detecting deception and emphasize the need of considering situational factors. Furthermore, they underscore the importance of prioritizing verbal content in professional lie-detection practices.

Identification accuracy can be predicted from eyewitnesses' self-reported decision processes but the evidence of their ability to improve prediction when confidence and response time are included is mixed and minimal. Typically, decision processes are measured via one or five self-report questions; we explored whether a more nuanced questionnaire could improve prediction. Participants viewed a mock-crime video, made a target-present or -absent lineup decision, and completed 17 decision process items. An exploratory factor analysis on choosers' (n = 391) responses revealed three correlated factors, broadly reflecting automatic response, relative judgment, and absolute judgment. The three-factor solution had good internal reliability (McDonald's ωs = 0.93, 0.89, and 0.74, respectively). Scores produced from the questions loading on the automatic response and relative judgment factors improved predictions of accuracy compared to using confidence and response time alone. Self-reported decision processes may be an easy-to-administer and useful reflector of identification accuracy.

Loftus and Pickrell's (1995) famous ‘Lost in the Mall’ false memory implantation experiment was recently replicated in Ireland. In this new study standard investigator judgements indicated many more false memories than did participants themselves, consistent with similar studies. We reanalysed the transcripts with investigator-judged false memories, focusing on recall of six suggested core details. On average, fewer than two details in the fake event were explicitly recalled; 20% with full and 58% with partial false memories did not recall being lost. Participants' own self-reported recall was associated with remembering more details. Half the participants described potentially true experiences, distinguishable from the fake event; this group recalled more suggested details but tended to remember them differently. The data suggested investigator ratings reflect individual comments made when participants are considering whether they remember different elements of the fake event but may not capture the way these comments are integrated in participants' own recall decisions.

Forensic facial professionals have been shown in previous studies to identify people from frontal face images more accurately than untrained participants when given 30 s per face pair. We tested whether this superiority holds in more challenging conditions. Two groups of forensic facial professionals (examiners, reviewers) and untrained participants were tested in three lab-based tasks: other-race face identification, disguised face identification, and face memory. For other-race face identification, on same-race faces, examiners were superior to controls; on different-race identification, examiners and controls performed comparably. Examiners were superior to controls for impersonation disguise, but not consistently superior for evasion disguise. Examiners' performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT+) was marginally better than reviewers and controls. We conclude that under laboratory-style conditions, professional examiners' identification superiority does not generalize completely to other-race and disguised faces. Future work should administer other-race and disguise face identification tests that allow forensic professionals to follow methods and procedures they typically use in casework.

Investigative interviewers are often required to accurately remember information that has been provided by different people. This can be at the scene of an event or during follow-up investigations in interview rooms. Interviewers must accurately monitor the source of information to differentiate between witnesses' accounts and to assess what information is novel and what has been corroborated by others or by physical evidence. The current research examined the effects of cognitive load on memory and source monitoring accuracy for information provided by multiple witnesses. Participants, under conditions of high cognitive load (HCL) where load was induced via interviewer-relevant tasks (e.g., formulating questions) or no cognitive load (NCL), watched five mock-witnesses' accounts of the same crime. Each witness provided several details of the crime that were unique to their individual account. When asked about account details, and which witness had provided each detail, mock-interviewers' memory accuracy was lower in the HCL condition than the NCL condition. There was no difference between cognitive load conditions for source monitoring accuracy, which was poor regardless of condition.