Metamemory is a person’s knowledge about their own memory. Metamemory judgments are sometimes accurate and sometimes not. Eakin (2005) found a dissociation between metamemory predictions and memory performance under conditions of retroactive interference and attributed this dissociation to the accessibility heuristic. This study investigated whether the accessibility heuristic would be used to make metamemory predictions in the more complex context of the eyewitness memory paradigm. The results indicate that the accessibility heuristic was used to make metamamory predictions. Memory performance was better for control than misled critical items, but people predicted they would perform equally well in both conditions. It appears that in the less austere context of the eyewitness memory paradigm, the amount of information accessible for control and misled items was equal, and therefore, metamemory judgments were equal for control and misled items.

After a crime has occurred, one of the most pressing objectives for investigators is to identify and interview any eyewitness that can provide information about the crime. Depending on his or her training, the investigative interviewer will use (to varying degrees) mostly yes/no questions, some cued and multiple-choice questions, with few open-ended questions. When the witness cannot generate any more details about the crime, one assumes the eyewitness’ memory for the critical event has been exhausted. However, given what we know about memory, is this a safe assumption? In line with the extant literature on human cognition, if one assumes (a) an eyewitness has more available memories of the crime than he or she has accessible and (b) only explicit probes have been used to elicit information, then one can argue this eyewitness may still be able to provide additional information via implicit memory tests. In accordance with these notions, the present study had two goals: demonstrate that (1) eyewitnesses can reveal memory implicitly for a detail-rich event and (2) particularly for brief crimes, eyewitnesses can reveal memory for event details implicitly that were inaccessible when probed for explicitly. Undergraduates (N = 227) participated in a psychological experiment in exchange for research credit. Participants were presented with one of three stimulus videos (brief crime vs. long crime vs. irrelevant video). Then, participants either completed a series of implicit memory tasks or worked on a puzzle for 5 minutes. Lastly, participants were interviewed explicitly about the previous video via free recall and recognition tasks. Findings indicated that participants who viewed the brief crime provided significantly more crime-related details implicitly than those who viewed the long crime. The data also showed participants who viewed the long crime provided marginally more accurate details during free recall than participants who viewed the brief crime. Furthermore, participants who completed the implicit memory tasks provided significantly less accurate information during the explicit interview than participants who were not given implicit memory tasks. This study was the first to investigate implicit memory for eyewitnesses of a crime. To determine its applied value, additional empirical work is required.

Basic research on expectancy effects suggests that investigative interviewers with pre-conceived notions about a crime may negatively influence the interview process in meaningful ways, yet many interviewing protocols recommend that interviewers review all available information prior to conducting their interviews. Previous research suggests that interviewers with no pre-interview knowledge elicit more detailed and accurate accounts than their informed counterparts (Cantlon, et al., 1996; Rivard et al., under review). The current study investigated whether (a) the benefit of blind versus informed interviewing is moderated by cautionary interviewer instructions to avoid suggestive questions and (b) whether any possible effects of pre-interview information extend beyond the immediate context of the forensic interview. Paired participants (N = 584) were assigned randomly either to the role of interviewer or witness. Witnesses viewed a mock crime video and were interviewed one week later by an interviewer who received either correct, incorrect, or no information about the crime event. Half of the interviewers were assigned randomly to receive additional instructions to avoid suggestive questions. All participants returned 1 week after the interview to recall the crime video (for the witness) or the information recalled by the witness during the interview (for the interviewer). All interviews and delayed recall measures were scored for the quantity and accuracy of information reported. Results replicate earlier findings that blind interviewers elicit more information from witnesses, without a decrease in accuracy rate. However instructions to avoid suggestive questions did not moderate the effect of blind versus informed interviewing on witness recall during the interview. Results further demonstrate that the effects of blind versus non-blind interviewing may extend beyond the immediate context of the interview to a later recall attempt. With instructions to avoid suggestive questions, witnesses of blind interviewers were more accurate than witnesses of incorrectly informed interviewers when recalling the event 1 week later. In addition, blind interviewers had more accurate memories for the witnesses’ account of the event during the interview compared to non-blind interviewers.

No description available.

Hypnosis has gained substantial support in the psychological community, as well as related health professions. The intense renewal of interest in hypnosis has also affected our legal-judicial system. Many police investigators trained in hypnosis operate from an exactcopy memory theory. They claim eyewitness eyewitness retrieve veridically stored memory traces from long-term memory, if questioned under hypnosis. Conversely, other researchers ascribe to a reconstructive memory theory. They believe hypnosis increases the likelihood of eliciting erroneous memories from eyewitnesses, especially under leading questioning. The purpose of the present investigation was to test the effects of hypnotic induction and anxiety on the accuracy of subjects' memory for eyewitnessed events when questioned with leading, non-leading, and embedded misinformation questions.

According to the misinformation effect, exposure to misleading post-event information typically impairs memory for the original event. Such findings are generally obtained in the laboratory using the misinformation paradigm. One component of the typical misinformation paradigm is that most of the post-event information corresponds with the event information, implying that the context surrounding the misinformation is the same as that of the original event. The present experiments investigated the role of such implication by presenting the experimental conditions with misleading items in a narrative that differed from the original event (a slide show) to varying degrees; both the location of the event and the persons described were varied. A significant misinformation effect was obtained regardless of implication condition. Even when a relationship between the witnessed event and post-event narrative was not implied, memory was impaired by the presence of misleading information. The findings are discussed in terms of retrieval blocking.

A wealth of research has highlighted the susceptibility of eyewitnesses to verbal influence. However, considerably less attention has been paid to the role of nonverbal influence in police questioning. The purpose of this thesis was to evaluate the extent to which gestures can exert an influence on witnesses and skew their responses when questioned. Study 1 initially investigated this by presenting participants with an on-screen 'police' interviewer who accompanied his questions with gestures conveying either accurate or misleading information about a piece of video footage they had witnessed. Results showed that, for one question in particular, participants' responses concurred with the information conveyed to them in gesture; accurate gestures led more participants to giving correct responses and misleading gestures led more participants to giving fabricated responses. Study 2 built on this by examining whether gestures could also affect the confidence attributed to their responses in order to give insight into whether gestures were knowingly processed for information. It was found that, in some cases, gestures were able to increase confidence in both accurate and misled responses. Study 3 examined participants' awareness of gesture further by studying their attention to gesture during its performance and ability to identify it retrospectively on a recognition task. A new set of questions confirmed that gestures could influence the responses of participants (including those working in the legal profession) and revealed that the influence of gesture appears to be at its strongest when unnoticed by participants. Finally, study 4 considered whether the results of the previous studies could be replicated in a more ecologically valid interview scenario and confirmed that gestures continued to be influential when performed face-to-face. Overall, it was concluded that gestures can impact accurate eyewitness testimony and can be a powerful influential tool in police interviews.

Diss. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Stockholms universitet, 2005. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.

In a large body of research, Elizabeth Loftus (1975) first illuminated major concerns about the inaccuracy of eyewitness accounts. The primary goal of the present research was to test whether training regarding common eyewitness mistakes and witness suggestibility could improve eyewitness accuracy. The experimental group watched a presentation on research conducted by Elizabeth Loftus (1975) on eyewitness testimony and suggestibility during a Psychology course. Afterwards, an actor interrupted the classroom and had a discussion with the teacher. Students were asked a series of questions about the disruption. Some of the questions were leading and suggested certain things about the disruption that were inaccurate. After the misleading questions were asked, students were instructed to write a brief summary of what they saw. One week later, the students were asked direct questions about the disruption. A control group did not receive the presentation on eyewitness testimony, but witnessed the exact same event as the experimental group and followed the same procedure. The results suggest that participants who were trained were not as influenced as participants in the control group. Additionally, students in the control group reported the actor's behavior as more threatening than did the experimental group. This research not only adds to the existing literature, but has the potential to improve current eyewitness identification procedures in order to strengthen our justice system.

The field of eyewitness memory has long been concerned with identifications but functioned in the absence of an explanatory theory. Recently Charman and Wells (2007) developed applied lineup theory to address this deficiency. They argue that quality of memory and the decision process interact to determine lineup decision accuracy. In a series of experiments I tested whether their theoretical assumptions hold for face recognition tasks and tested the theory using simple manipulations with lineups. Experiments 1 through 7 utilized a face recognition paradigm. In Experiments 1 through 5, the relationship between quality of memory and face recognition accuracy was explored as a function of frequency of viewing, duration of viewing, and depth of processing. The results indicated that, as expected, increased frequency of viewing and deeper processing of faces at encoding led to better recognition memory. Unexpectedly, increasing the duration of viewing did not increase recognition memory. In the remaining experiments (Experiments 6 to 9) I manipulated the decision process by manipulating the match between a face image shown at encoding and retrieval and how quickly participants were able to respond. The results of Experiments 6 and 7 only weakly supported applied lineup theory. In Experiments 8 and 9 I used a lineup paradigm and again found little support for applied lineup theory. Notably, the manipulations of decision process were relatively unsuccessful in Experiments 6 to 9. The stimulus manipulations used may not have been sufficient to produce differences in the decision process or applied lineup theory may not account for lineup decisions. Suggestions for future research on lineup decision processes to clarify whether applied lineup theory can account for lineup decisions are made. / Thesis (Ph.D, Psychology) -- Queen's University, 2010-09-18 16:10:43.637