Return to search

How Psychology’s Empirical Results Can Benefit the Criminal Justice System: Expert Testimony

Brigham and Bothwell (1983) claimed that jurors have a scientifically incorrect view of eyewitness testimony. The purpose of this study was to examine the most beneficial way to assist the jury in dealing with eyewitness testimony. Duckworth, Kreiner, Stark-Wroblewski, and Marsh (2011) applied interactive participation in an eyewitness activity and expert testimony to a mock-jury dealing with eyewitness testimony and found that those who participated in the activity had significantly fewer convictions. The methodological framework of the Duckworth et al. study was applied to East Tennessee State University criminal justice undergraduates. Although this study did not find any significant effects in hearing expert testimony on empirical findings regarding eyewitness testimony or participating in an individual recall activity, cross tabulation frequencies indicated a directional pattern of relationship when independent variables were compared to the control group.

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:ETSU/oai:dc.etsu.edu:etd-2331
Date01 May 2013
CreatorsMcCurry, Ford C
PublisherDigital Commons @ East Tennessee State University
Source SetsEast Tennessee State University
Detected LanguageEnglish
Typetext
Formatapplication/pdf
SourceElectronic Theses and Dissertations
RightsCopyright by the authors.

Page generated in 0.0018 seconds