Does Post-identification Feedback Affect Evaluations of Eyewitness Testimony and Identification Procedures?
- 558 Downloads
Two experiments were conducted to test whether post-identification feedback affects evaluations of eyewitnesses. In Experiment 1 (N = 156), evaluators viewed eyewitness testimony. They evaluated witnesses who received confirming post-identification feedback as more accurate and more confident, among other judgments, compared with witnesses who received disconfirming post-identification feedback or no feedback. This pattern persisted regardless of whether the witness’s confidence statement was included in the testimony. In Experiment 2 (N = 161), witness evaluators viewed the actual identification procedure in which feedback was delivered. Instructions to disregard the feedback were manipulated. Again, witnesses who received confirming feedback were assessed more positively. This pattern occurred even when witness evaluators received instructions to disregard the feedback. These experiments are the first to confirm researchers’ assumptions that feedback effects on witnesses translate to changes in judgments of those witnesses.
KeywordsPost-identification feedback Eyewitness memory Testimony
We thank Erik Hood, Sarah Jordan, and Amy Rosania for their assistance in data collection and data entry for witness data in Experiment 1. We thank Afton Pavletic for her assistance in producing portions of the manuscript. We also thank Andrea Lichtman whose senior honors thesis inspired Experiment 1.
- Australian Law Reform Commission (2005). Discussion Paper 69, Review of the Uniform Evidence Acts.Google Scholar
- Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Oxford, England: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Douglass, A. B., Brewer, N., & Semmler, C. (in press). Moderators of post-identification feedback effects on eyewitnesses’ memory reports. Legal and Criminological Psychology.Google Scholar
- Douglass, A. B., & Jones, E. (2009). Evaluations of confidence inflation in eyewitnesses: Does it matter how the original confidence statement is preserved? Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
- Doyle, J. M. (2005). True witness: Cops, courts, science, and the battle against misidentification. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Manson v. Braithwaite. (1977). 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243.Google Scholar
- Quinlivan, D. S., Neuschatz, J. S., Jimenez, A., Cling, A. D., Douglass, A. B., & Goodsell, C. A. (2009). Do prophylactics prevent inflation?: Post-identification feedback and the effectiveness of procedures to protect against confidence-inflation in earwitnesses. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 111–121.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Quinlivan, D. S., Wells, G. L., & Neuschatz, J. S. (2009). Is manipulative intent necessary to mitigate the eyewitness post-identification feedback effect? Law and Human Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10979-009-9179-7.
- R v. Turnbull. Queen’s Bench 224 (1976).Google Scholar
- Wells, G. L., Ferguson, T. J., & Lindsay, R. C. (1981). The tractability of eyewitness confidence and its implications for triers of fact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(6), 681–696.Google Scholar