Expectations of Eyewitness Performance: Jurors' Verdicts Do Not Follow From Their Beliefs (From Adult Eyewitness Testimony: Current Trends and Developments, P 362-384, 1994, David Frank Ross, et al, eds. -- See NCJ-159543)

• NCJ Number: 159560
• Author(s): R C L Lindsay
• Date Published: 1994
• Length: 23 pages
• Sale Source: Cambridge University Press
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Eyewitness identification has been cited as perhaps the single most persuasive source of evidence but also as the most frequent cause of wrongful convictions.

Abstract

Because eyewitnesses are considered by jurors to be a credible source of evidence, studies have been conducted to determine what factors, in addition to eyewitness confidence, influence eyewitness beliefs. These studies show jurors may not be aware of factors that actually influence their decisions to believe eyewitness testimony rather than dismiss it. Expert testimony on eyewitness issues easily meets the legal criteria of evidence admissibility, but most people do not know how to evaluate the accuracy of eyewitness identification, underestimate the importance of many relevant variables, and apply significantly wrong expectations regarding other variables. Unfortunately, it is not clear that expert testimony on eyewitness issues assists jurors if the criterion of assistance is that superior decisions be made. The author notes that lineup procedures can be altered to dramatically reduce the probability of false identification and that the most important contribution of psychologists to the eyewitness area involves developing techniques to increase eyewitness report accuracy. Consideration is paid to the perceived importance of eyewitness variables, variables thought to determine eyewitness accuracy, methodological limitations of eyewitness studies, and findings of mock jury studies. 54 references and 2 tables