Abstract
When eyewitnesses and criminal suspects change their sworn testimony, their credibility is challenged, either because inconsistent testimony is a sign that people have poor memories or because they are deceptive and “can’t keep their story straight.” As reviewed below, inconsistency is the most often cited reason for discrediting others (e.g., Brewer, Potter, Fisher, Bond, & Lusczc, 1999; Granhag & Strömwall, 2000; Stromwall, Granhag, & Jonsson, 2003) and is often the attack point for impeaching witnesses in the courtroom. But is it justifiable? In support of this approach, research on memory warns us that changes in recollection may be the product of contamination from sources such as misleading questions, which could distort memory (Loftus, 1975; see Yarbrough, Hervé, & Harms, this volume). However, one can imagine just the opposite pattern: in an effort to sound truthful, good liars often simply repeat whatever they said earlier and, so, they may be more, not less, consistent than truth-tellers (Vrij, Granhag, & Mann, 2010). Perhaps the true meaning of inconsistency is not so obvious.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Berman, G. L., & Cutler, B. L. (1996). Effects of inconsistencies in eyewitness testimony on mock-juror decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 170–177.
Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (1993). Memory independence and memory interference in cognitive development. Psychological Review, 100, 42–67.
Brewer, N., & Burke, A. (2002). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 353–364.
Brewer, N., & Hupfeld, R. M. (2004). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and witness group identity on mock-juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 493–513.
Brewer, N., Potter, R., Fisher, R. P., Bond, N., & Lusczc, M. A. (1999). Beliefs and data on the relationship between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 297–313.
Brock, P., Fisher, R. P., & Cutler, B. L. (1999). Examining the cognitive interview in a double-test paradigm. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5, 29–45.
Cahill, B.S., Fisher, R.P., & Rivard, J.J. (2011). Catching liars with cartoons. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Miami, Florida.
Carbone, J. & Fisher, R.P. (2011). Inconsistency on the witness stand. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Miami, Florida.
Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions of the District Judges Association (2005). Sixth circuit criminal pattern jury instructions.
Erdelyi, M. H. (1996). The recovery of unconscious memories: Hypermnesia and reminiscence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Evans, J. R. (2011). Eyewitness memory: Balancing the accuracy, precision, and quantity of information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 501–508.
Fisher, R. P., & Cutler, B. L. (1995). The relation between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony. In G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, M. McMurran, & C. Wilson (Eds.), Law and criminal justice: International developments in research and practice. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Fisher, R. P., Falkner, K. L., Trevisan, M., & McCauley, M. R. (2000). Adapting the Cognitive Interview to enhance long term (35 years) recall of physical activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 180–189.
Fisher, R.P. & Patterson, T. (2004). The relationship between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness memory. Paper presented at 45th Annual Meeting of the Psychnomic Society, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Gabbert, F., Memon, A., & Allen, K. (2003). Memory conformity: Can eyewitnesses influence each other’s memories for an event? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 533–543.
Gilbert, J. A. E., & Fisher, R. P. (2006). The effects of varied retrieval cues on reminiscence in eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 723–739.
Glissan, J. L. (1991). Cross-examination: Practice and procedure. Sydney: Butterworths.
Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (1999). Repeated interrogations: Stretching the deception detection paradigm. Expert Evidence, 7, 163–174.
Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2000). Deception detection: Examining the consistency heuristic. In C. M. Breur, M. M. Kommer, J. F. Nijboer, & J. M. Reintjes (Eds.), New trends in criminal investigation and evidence (Vol. 2, pp. 309–321). Antwerpen: Intresentia.
Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2001). Deception detection based on repeated interrogations. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 6, 85–101.
Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A., & Jonsson, A.-C. (2003). Partners in crime: How liars in collusion betray themselves. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 848–868.
Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. (2007). Guilty and innocent suspects’ strategies during police interrogations. Psychology, Crime and Law, 13, 213–227.
Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3–28.
Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic manipulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103, 490–517.
La Rooy, D., Lamb, M. E., & Pipe, M.-E. (2008). Repeated interviewing: A critical evaluation of the risks and potential benefits. In K. Kuehnle & M. Connell (Eds.), Child sexual abuse: Research, evaluation, and testimony for the courts. Hoboken: Wiley.
La Rooy, D., Pipe, M.-E., & Murray, J. E. (2005). Reminiscence and hypermnesia in children’s eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90, 235–254.
Leins, D., Fisher, R. P., & Vrij, A. (2012). Drawing on liars’ lack of cognitive flexibility: detecting deception through varying report modes. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 601–607.
Leins, D., Fisher, R. P., Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2011). Using sketch-drawing to induce inconsistency in liars. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 16, 253–265.
Leippe, M. R., Manion, A. P., & Romanczyk, A. (1992). Eyewitness persuasion: How and how well do fact finders judge the accuracy of adults’ and children’s memory reports? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 181–197.
Lindsay, R. C. L., Lim, R., Marando, L., & Cully, D. (1986). Mock-juror evaluations of eyewitness testimony: A test of metamemory hypotheses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 447–459.
Loftus, E. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 550–572.
Mitchell, T., Haw, R., & Fisher, R. P. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy: Can accuracy for one statement be predictive of more ‘global’ accuracy? Paper presented at European Psych-Law Society. Edinburgh.
Payne, D. (1987). Hypermnesia and reminiscence in recall: A historical and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 5–27.
Pezdek, K. (2003). Event memory and autobiographical memory for the events of September 11, 2001. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 1033–1045.
Shuy, R. (1998). The language of confession, interrogation and deception. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2003). How to detect deception? Arresting the beliefs of police officers, prosecutors and judges. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9, 19–36.
Strömwall, L. A., & Granhag, P. A. (2005). Children’s repeated lies and truths: Effects on adult’s judgments and Reality Monitoring scores. Psychiatry, Psychology & Law, 12, 345–356.
Strömwall, L. A., Granhag, P. A., & Jonsson, A.-C. (2003). Deception among pairs: “Let’s say we had lunch and hope they will swallow it!”. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9, 109–124.
Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory. Oxford: Clarendon.
Vrij, A. (2011). “Eliciting cues to deception and truth” What matters are the questions asked. Submitted to the Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition.
Vrij, A., & Granhag, P-A. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition , 1, 110–117.
Vrij, A., Leal, S., Granhag, P. A., Mann, S., Fisher, R. P., Hillman, J., & Sperry, K. (2009). Outsmarting the Liars: The benefit of asking unanticipated questions. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 159–166.
Wagenaar, W. A., & Groeneweg, J. (1990). The memory of concentration camp survivors. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 77–87.
Warren, A. R., & Woodall, C. E. (1999). The reliability of hearsay testimony: How well do interviewers recall their interviews with children? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 355–371.
Zulawski, D. E., & Wicklander, D. E. (1993). Practical aspects of interview and interrogation. New York: CRC Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fisher, R.P., Vrij, A., Leins, D.A. (2013). Does Testimonial Inconsistency Indicate Memory Inaccuracy and Deception? Beliefs, Empirical Research, and Theory. In: Cooper, B., Griesel, D., Ternes, M. (eds) Applied Issues in Investigative Interviewing, Eyewitness Memory, and Credibility Assessment. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5546-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5547-9
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)