Online co‐witness discussions also lead to eyewitness memory distortion: The MORI ‐v technique

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Cadavid ◽  
Karlos Luna
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
Memory Distortion

scholarly journals Eyewitness Memory Distortion Following Co-Witness Discussion: A Replication of Garry, French, Kinzett, and Mori (2008) in Ten Countries

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuo Mori
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Recognition Test ◽  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
Memory Distortion ◽  
Final Test ◽  
Total N ◽  
The United Kingdom

We examined the replicability of the co-witness suggestibility effect originally reported by Garry et al. (2008) by testing participants from 10 countries (Brazil, Canada, Colombia, India, Japan, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, total N = 486). Pairs of participants sat beside each other, viewing different versions of the same movie while believing that they viewed the same version. Later, participant pairs answered questions collaboratively, which guided them to discuss conflicting details. Finally, participants took a recognition test individually. Each of the 10 samples replicated the Garry et al. finding: Participants often reported on the final test a non-witnessed answer that their co-witness had stated during the collaboration phase. Such co-witness suggestibility errors were especially likely when the witness had not disputed the co-witness’s report during the collaboration phase. The results demonstrate the replicability and generalizability of the co-witness suggestibility effect.

scholarly journals Eyewitness Memory Distortion Following Co-Witness Discussion: A Replication of Garry, French, Kinzett, and Mori (2008) in Ten Countries

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Ito ◽  
Krystian Barzykowski ◽  
Magdalena Grzesik ◽  
Sami Gülgöz ◽  
Ceren Gürdere ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
Memory Distortion

Confidence and accuracy of eyewitness memory for target faces at different ages

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher D. Kimbrough ◽  
Brian H. Bornstein ◽  
Heather Bryden
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
Different Ages

Do Sequential Lineups Impair Discriminability?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Philip Kaesler ◽  
John C Dunn ◽  
Keith Ransom ◽  
Carolyn Semmler
Keyword(s):  
Human Behavior ◽  
Feature Detection ◽  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
Simultaneous Presentation ◽  
Diagnostic Feature ◽  
Sequential Presentation ◽  
Sequential Lineups ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Sequential Lineup ◽  
Lineup Procedures

The debate regarding the best way to test and measure eyewitness memory has dominated the eyewitness literature for more than thirty years. We argue that to resolve this debate requires the development and application of appropriate measurement models. In this study we develop models of simultaneous and sequential lineup presentations and use these to compare the procedures in terms of discriminability and response bias. We tested a key prediction of the diagnostic feature detection hypothesis that discriminability should be greater for simultaneous than sequential lineups. We fit the models to the corpus of studies originally described by Palmer and Brewer (2012, Law and Human Behavior, 36(3), 247-255) and to data from a new experiment. The results of both investigations showed that discriminability did not differ between the two procedures, while responses were more conservative for sequential presentation compared to simultaneous presentation. We conclude that the two procedures do not differ in the efficiency with which they allow eyewitness memory to be expressed. We discuss the implications of this for the diagnostic feature detection hypothesis and other sequential lineup procedures used in current jurisdictions.

The impact of recall timing on the preservation of eyewitness memory

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Chantal Chevroulet ◽  
Helen M. Paterson ◽  
Angus Yu ◽  
Emily Chew ◽  
Richard I. Kemp
Keyword(s):  
Eyewitness Memory ◽  
The Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document