Mock-juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses: A replication and extension.

Roderick C. L. Lindsay · Gary L. Wells · Fergus J. O'Connor

144 citations0/0 files storedLaw and Human Behavior

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Jury Decision Making Processes Memory Processes and Influences Deception detection and forensic psychology

Abstract

In response to lawyers' critiques of earlier staged-crime, mock-jury studies, 16 eyewitnesses to a staged crime were videotaped while being questioned by lawyers in a real courthouse. Accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses were questioned by experienced or inexperienced lawyers for the prosecution and defense. Subsequently, 178 University of Alberta undergraduates served as mock-jurors and attempted to detect the accuracy of the witnesses based on their taped testimony. As in the previous research, the overall rate of belief was quite high (69%), and the subjects believed the testimony of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses at about the same rate (68% vs. 70%, respectively). Lawyers' experience failed to influence verdict. Confidence of the eyewitness was significantly related to belief of their testimony. The data replicate the previous findings and demonstrate that lack of expertise of the questioners does not account for the failure to detect eyewitness accuracy in this paradigm.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 144 citations exist upstream.

References

1962Statistical principles in experimental design.1964Statistical Principles in Experimental Design 1985Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation.1979Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification.1988Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases.1983Eyewitness identification: What can a psychologist tell a jury?

Cited by

2008Describing inner experience?: proponent meets skeptic 1996Effects of inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony on mock-juror decision making.1995Effects of inconsistent eyewitness statements on mock-jurors' evaluations of the eyewitness, perceptions of defendant culpability and verdicts.1995The case for expert testimony about eyewitness memory.2009Does Trial presentation medium matter in jury simulation research? Evaluating the effectiveness of eyewitness expert testimony 2004An Aiibi Witness' Influence on Mock Jurors' Verdicts1 2003Juror sensitivity to the cross-race effect.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.