Literature DB >> 26335413

Ordered questions bias eyewitnesses and jurors.

Robert B Michael1, Maryanne Garry2.   

Abstract

Eyewitnesses play an important role in the justice system. But suggestive questioning can distort eyewitness memory and confidence, and these distorted beliefs influence jurors (Loftus, Learning & Memory, 12, 361-366, 2005; Penrod & Culter, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1, 817-845, 1995). Recent research, however, hints that suggestion is not necessary: Simply changing the order of a set of trivia questions altered people's beliefs about their accuracy on those questions (Weinstein & Roediger, Memory & Cognition, 38, 366-376, 2010, Memory & Cognition, 40, 727-735, 2012). We wondered to what degree eyewitnesses' beliefs-and in turn the jurors who evaluate them-would be affected by this simple change to the order in which they answer questions. Across six experiments, we show that the order of questions matters. Eyewitnesses reported higher accuracy and were more confident about their memory when questions seemed initially easy, than when they seemed initially difficult. Moreover, jurors' beliefs about eyewitnesses closely matched those of the eyewitnesses themselves. These findings have implications for eyewitness metacognition and for eyewitness questioning procedures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Eyewitness; Juror; Memory; Question order

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26335413     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-015-0933-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  12 in total

1.  Relative - not absolute - judgments of credibility affect susceptibility to misinformation conveyed during discussion.

Authors:  Lauren French; Maryanne Garry; Kazuo Mori
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2010-11-26

2.  The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: why the adjustments are insufficient.

Authors:  Nicholas Epley; Thomas Gilovich
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-04

3.  Calibration trumps confidence as a basis for witness credibility.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Tenney; Robert J MacCoun; Barbara A Spellman; Reid Hastie
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-01

4.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1974-09-27       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Does post-identification feedback affect evaluations of eyewitness testimony and identification procedures?

Authors:  Amy Bradfield Douglass; Jeffrey S Neuschatz; Jennifer Imrich; Miranda Wilkinson
Journal:  Law Hum Behav       Date:  2009-07-08

Review 6.  Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy.

Authors:  A Koriat; M Goldsmith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Trivial persuasion in the courtroom: the power of (a few) minor details.

Authors:  B E Bell; E F Loftus
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1989-05

8.  Retrospective bias in test performance: Providing easy items at the beginning of a test makes students believe they did better on it.

Authors:  Yana Weinstein; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-04

Review 9.  Planting misinformation in the human mind: a 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory.

Authors:  Elizabeth F Loftus
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2005-07-18       Impact factor: 2.460

10.  Impression formation of tests: retrospective judgments of performance are higher when easier questions come first.

Authors:  Abigail Jackson; Robert L Greene
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.