The "general acceptance" of psychological research on eyewitness testimony: A survey of the experts.

63 experts on eyewitness testimony were surveyed about their courtroom experiences and opinions on various issues. There was a strong consensus indicated by an agreement rate of at least 80% that the data on the following topics are reliable enough to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, misleading postevent information, the accuracy–confidence correlation, attitudes and expectations, exposure time, unconscious transference, showups, and the forgetting curve. Over 70% of the experts also endorsed lineup fairness, the cross-race identification bias among White witnesses, and the tendency to overestimate the duration of events. Although most eyewitness experts who have testified have done so on behalf of criminal defendants, they were just as likely to consent for the prosecution as for the defense; moreover, they were more likely to agree to testify in civil cases than in criminal. Concerning their role in court, most respondents indicated that their main objective is to educate the jury, and that juries are more competent with the aid of experts than without. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

What do we not know about eyewitness identification?

G. L. Wells (see record 1993-39684-001) suggests that recent advances in psychological knowledge may lead to improvements in the procedures used by the police in conducting lineups and photospreads. This optimistic appraisal of what psychologists can tell the police prompted a brief reappraisal of a more pessimistic review (M. McCloskey and H. Egeth, 1983) of what psychologists can tell a jury. Although research on eyewitness testimony continues to accumulate and to improve in quality, there seems to be little reason to think that psychologists can help juries understand the effects on eyewitness identification of such factors as arousal, weapon focus, unconscious transference, prior exposure to mugshots, or cross-racial identification. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Children's identification of faces from lineups: The effects of lineup presentation and instructions on accuracy.

The authors investigated whether the type of lineup and instructions given to children 6-7 or 9-10 years of age affected their identification accuracy. Children witnessed a man stealing property and were later asked to identify him in either photo or video lineups. Some lineups contained the target and some did not. Two lineup procedures were used (standard or elimination), and 2 types of instruction were used (standard or cautioning about false identification). Standard lineups with cautioning instructions decreased target-absent errors with no associated reduction in correct identifications, but elimination lineups did not. Lineup media had an interaction effect whereby correct identifications were reduced in video but not photo elimination lineups. The results are discussed in a forensic context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects on mock jurors of experts favorable and unfavorable toward hypnotically elicited eyewitness testimony.

Mock jurors were told that a rape victim's initial identification of the defendant was made either during a police interrogation or a hypnotic interrogation. Jurors given the hypnotic interrogation case then saw a videotape of an expert who was favorable toward hypnotically elicited testimony, an expert who was unfavorable, or both experts. Jurors' private beliefs of the defendant's guilt (assessed before exposure to the experts) was not influenced by knowledge that the witness had been hypnotized. However, jurors' guilt ratings were significantly influenced by both the favorable and the unfavorable experts and by the process of deliberation. Juries in all treatments strongly favored acquittal, and jury verdicts were not significantly influenced by expert testimony. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Elimination lineups: An improved identification procedure for child eyewitnesses.

Elimination lineup procedures were proposed that required the witness to eliminate all but 1 lineup member before being asked if the remaining lineup member was the criminal. Elimination lineups were designed and tested with the aim of reducing false-positive choices by child eyewitnesses (n?=?587 children, 10–14 years, M?=?12 years; n?=?185 adults). Elimination lineups decreased false-positive responding in children without significantly reducing correct identifications. Fast elimination lineups with modified instructions emphasizing the negative consequences of identifying an innocent person and explaining how to make an absolute judgment significantly decreased children's false-positive rate to a level comparable with adults shown a simultaneous lineup. The potential benefits of elimination lineup procedures for child witnesses are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender.

100 college student eyewitnesses of a staged vandalism received varying lineup instructions under conditions in which the offender was present or absent. Biased instructions implied that Ss were to choose someone, whereas unbiased instructions provided a "no choice" option. Ss viewed corporeal lineups on 1 of 3 evenings following the vandalism. A high rate of choosing occurred under biased instructions, and the lowest rate occurred under unbiased instructions with the vandal absent. Identification errors were highest under biased instructions with the vandal absent. With the vandal present under biased instructions all errors were false identifications, whereas under unbiased instructions all errors were false rejections of the lineup. Confidence ratings were obtained following Ss' identification decision. Ss making a choice had high confidence scores, whereas those rejecting the lineup had low confidence scores. Unbiased instructions reduced choosing and false identifications without decreasing correct identifications. Both identifications and nonidentifications had greater "diagnosticity" under unbiased than under biased instructions. (27 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Instructing jurors on general damages in personal injury cases: Problems and possibilities.

The authors consider instructions that courts do or could give to jurors to guide them in making awards for general damages in civil litigation. The authors review the nature and content of current instructions about the factors that should (or should not) affect jurors' awards, as well as the limited body of empirical research on the impact of these instructions. The most noteworthy feature of current instructions regarding damages is the lack of guidance they provide. The consequence appears to be awards that have considerable variability and that are influenced by improper considerations. The authors also discuss research on the effectiveness of alternative forms of jury instructions and trial procedures in preventing or reducing these problems. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The case for expert testimony about eyewitness memory.

Eyewitness expert testimony informs a jury about psychological processes and accuracy related variables in eyewitness testimony. Appropriately chosen testimony is not prejudicial, and it is on sound scientific ground. Eyewitness research has established reliable, applicable findings and demonstrated that jurors have insufficient knowledge of some findings and poorly judge eyewitness accuracy. Studies of trial dynamics and reactions to eyewitnesses suggest a sizable risk of inordinate eyewitness impact, creating sizable risk of conviction on the basis of mistaken identifications. Trial simulations examining eyewitness expert testimony indicate it promotes modest, appropriate increases in skepticism about eyewitnesses, even when the expert gives a general overview of research and admits to limitations. The psychological and legal professions should develop responsible guidelines for use of expert testimony in court. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of cross-racial/ethnic friendships in social adjustment.

The purpose of this study was to examine the frequency and correlates of cross-racial/ethnic friendships. The sample consisted of 509 (188 African American, 135 European American, 106 Asian American, and 80 Latino) children in 4th grade from 39 classrooms in several public elementary schools. The authors hypothesized that (a) the frequency of cross-racial/ethnic friendships would be different across races/ethnicities and (b) these friendships would be uniquely associated with social adjustment (relational inclusion, leadership). Results showed that European American children displayed a higher frequency of cross-racial/ethnic friendships than African American children. Compared with the sample average, Latino children exhibited a lower frequency of these friendships. Further, findings revealed that children who formed cross-racial/ethnic friendships were more likely to be viewed as relationally inclusive and possessing leadership skills by teachers. Overall, the results showed that cross-racial/ethnic friendships were associated with positive developmental outcomes and that future studies that examine how these friendships are formed and maintained, and how these pathways are related to social adjustment, are warranted. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

What do we know about eyewitness identification?

A better understanding of eyewitness identification from lineups and photospreads has emerged in the psychological literature over the last dozen years. The structural and procedural aspects of lineups have been likened to the conduct of an experiment with direct analogies to experimenter effects, confoundings, and control conditions. The process of lineup identifications seems to be governed at least in part by relative similarity judgments, which prove to be problematic wherever the actual culprit is not a member of the lineup. Several advances have been made in the instructions, structure, content, and evaluation of lineups and photospreads that can improve the ratio of accurate to false identifications. Combinations of the best features of a lineup can produce well-defined upper limits on false identification rates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of biracial learning teams on cross-racial friendships.

Investigated biracial learning teams and cross-racial friendships in desegregated junior high schools. Ss were 294 7th- and 8th-grade students in 12 English classes (170 Whites, 124 Blacks). Each of 5 teachers taught 1–2 experimental classes and 1–2 control classes for 10 wks. Experimental Ss studied worksheets in 4–5 member biracial teams and received regulation based on the sum of members' quiz scores. Controls studied alone and received individual quiz scores only. Results indicate that experimental Ss increased more than controls in the number of cross-racial friendship choices made on a sociometric instrument, and in the percentage of cross-racial choices over all choices. A follow-up of a subsample of 2 classes 9 mo after the project showed the effects of the experimental treatments maintained over time. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intergroup biases and eyewitness testimony

The study examined how the in-group/out-group status of a perpetrator of a distinctly violent crime might influence an eyewitness's evaluation of his behavior and a witness's performance in an identification task. Immigrant and Swedish students saw a film showing a simulated robbery, with an immigrant or a Swede as the perpetrator. Results showed that both groups evaluated an ethnically dissimilar perpetrator as more culpable than an ethnically similar perpetrator. In a line-up task, both immigrant and Swedish participants mistakenly identified an innocent immigrant more often than an innocent Swede. Participants' biased evaluations of the perpetrator are discussed in terms of cognitive and motivational mechanisms. Expectations regarding the typical ethnicity of a perpetrator of this type of crime are suggested to account for the findings of the line-up task.     

The significance of cross-racial/ethnic friendships: Associations with peer victimization, peer support, sociometric status, and classroom diversity.

This short-term longitudinal study examined the associations between cross-racial/ethnic friendships and relative changes in forms of peer victimization or peer support and the roles of classroom diversity and sociometric status (i.e., social preference) in these associations. A total of 444 children (age range: 9–10 years) from racially/ethnically diverse elementary schools participated in this study. Results demonstrated that cross-racial/ethnic friendships (but not same-racial/ethnic friendships) uniquely predicted relative decreases in relational victimization. Further, classroom diversity moderated the relations of cross-racial/ethnic friendships with relative decreases in physical victimization and relative increases in peer support, such that these relations were stronger for children in highly diverse classrooms. Finally, social preference mediated the association between cross-racial/ethnic friendships and relative decreases in relational victimization. The associations among cross-racial/ethnic friendships, same-racial/ethnic friendships, social experiences with peers, and classroom diversity are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Precious little guidance: Jury instruction on damage awards.

Jury instructions on damage awards are notoriously vague and ambiguous. As a result, awards are sometimes unexpected and seemingly illogical. In this article, the authors argue that jury instructions regarding damages are vague because the law of damages itself is purposefully ambiguous—allowing particularized justice across a variety of different circumstances. The authors review research on comprehension and application of substantive jury instructions related to damages and on procedural variations at trial (e.g., use of preinstruction, bifurcation, blindfolding jurors to various issues, special verdict forms, caps on damages, and instruction revision) that impact the substantive instructions that jurors receive from the judge. They comment on attempts at reforming jury instructions regarding damages and conclude that jurors' decision making on this difficult and emotional issue could be made more predictable by careful reforms at the trial level. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: Effects of lineup instructions, foil similarity, and target-absent base rates.

Discriminating accurate from mistaken eyewitness identifications is a major issue facing criminal justice systems. This study examined whether eyewitness confidence assists such decisions under a variety of conditions using a confidence-accuracy (CA) calibration approach. Participants (N = 1,200) viewed a simulated crime and attempted 2 separate identifications from 8-person target-present or target-absent lineups. Confidence and accuracy were calibrated for choosers (but not nonchoosers) for both targets under all conditions. Lower overconfidence was associated with higher diagnosticity, lower target-absent base rates, and shorter identification latencies. Although researchers agree that courtroom expressions of confidence are uninformative, our findings indicate that confidence assessments obtained immediately after a positive identification can provide a useful guide for investigators about the likely accuracy of an identification. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts.

In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the cross-race bias, weapon focus, the accuracy–confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How effective are the cross-examination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures.

Mock jurors (N = 800) viewed a videotaped trial that included information about a lineup identification procedure. Suggestiveness of the eyewitness identification procedure varied in terms of foil, instruction, and presentation biases. Expert testimony regarding the factors that influence lineup suggestiveness was also manipulated. Criteria included juror ratings of lineup suggestiveness and fairness, ratings of defendant culpability, and verdicts. Jurors were sensitive to foil bias but only minimally sensitive to instruction and presentation biases. Expert testimony enhanced juror sensitivity only to instruction bias. These results have implications for the effectiveness of cross-examination and expert testimony as safeguards against erroneous convictions resulting from mistaken identifications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reducing the biasing effects of judges' nonverbal behavior with simplified jury instruction.

This research hypothesized that using simpler jury instructions would reduce jurors' reliance on judges' nonverbal behavior. Mock jurors were given either standard or simplified jury instructions, heard actual trial testimony, and then saw a judge reading jury instructions (i.e., a judge who had an expectation or belief of either guilt or innocence for a defendant). This experiment was conducted twice, once with a student population and once with an adult population. For the students neither the judges' expectations nor the jury instructions were strongly related to the jurors' verdicts. For the adults, jurors returned more guilty verdicts overall when judges thought the defendant was guilty, and this trend was moderated by the jury instructions. The relationship between judges' expectations and jurors' verdicts was strongly positive when standard instructions were given but was weaker and in the opposite direction when simplified instructions were given. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)