“I Think He Had A Tattoo On His Neck”: How Co-Witness Discussions About A Perpetrator's Description Can Affect Eyewitness Identification Decisions

False reports of an accomplice in a crime scene: conformity effects on memory confidence and accuracy

Abstract The memory reports of a given individual may be altered by preceding memory reports of another individual, a phenomenon termed memory conformity. To investigate this phenomenon, 58 undergraduate students were separated in two groups which watched one of two slightly different movies of a crime scene (one included an accomplice). Subsequently, pairs containing one participant from each group discussed the movie, and then participants responded individually whether there was an accomplice in the scene. The frequency of false reports and their confidence for the presence/absence of the accomplice were analyzed. Only false reports of seeing an accomplice were produced (by 31% of those who saw no accomplice), and confidence were as high for these responses as for correct “no-accomplice” responses. The data is consistent with prior findings, and show that confidence on false reports can be high when involving “insertion” of elements to witnessed events.

Reasons to Doubt the Reliability of Eyewitness Memory: Commentary on Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher (2018)

Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher (this issue) take issue with the common trope that eyewitness memory is inherently unreliable. They draw on a large body of mock-crime research and a small number of field studies, which indicate that high-confidence eyewitness reports are usually accurate, at least when memory is uncontaminated and suitable interviewing procedures are used. We agree with the thrust of Wixted et al.'s argument and welcome their invitation to confront the mass underselling of eyewitnesses' potential reliability. Nevertheless, we argue that there is a comparable risk of overselling eyewitnesses' reliability. Wixted et al.'s reasoning implies that near-pristine conditions or uncontaminated memories are normative, but there are at least two good reasons to doubt this. First, psychological science does not yet offer a good understanding of how often and when eyewitness interviews might deviate from best practice in ways that compromise the accuracy of witnesses' reports. Second, witnesses may frequently be exposed to preinterview influences that could corrupt reports obtained in best-practice interviews.

Memory at the Sharp End: The Costs of Remembering With Others in Forensic Contexts

In many applied contexts where accurate and reliable information informs operational decision-making, emergency response resource allocation, efficient investigation, judicial process, and, ultimately, the delivery of justice, the costs of unfettered conversational remembering can be high. To date, research has demonstrated that conversations between co-witnesses in the immediate aftermath of witnessed events and co-witness retellings of witnessed events often impair both the quality and quantity of information reported subsequently. Given the largely negative impact of conversational remembering on the recall of both individual witnesses and groups of witnesses in this context, this review explores the reasons why these costs occur, the conditions under which costs are exacerbated, and how, in practical terms, the costs can be reduced in order to maximize the accuracy and completeness of witness accounts.