NCJ Number
90643
Journal
American Psychologist Volume: 38 Issue: 5 Dated: (May 1983) Pages: 550-563
Date Published
1983
Length
14 pages
Annotation
Available evidence fails to demonstrate that expert psychological testimony will routinely improve jurors' ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony. Moreover, such testimony may have detrimental effects.
Abstract
Psychologists have long been concerned about the use of eyewitness testimony in the courtroom. Recently, it has been suggested that psychologists should testify as expert witnesses to inform the jury about problems with eyewitness testimony. This article examines the arguments in favor of expert testimony about eyewitnesses, but concludes that evidence does not support such testimony. It is suggested that experimental psychologists should carefully consider the issues raised when deciding whether to offer expert testimony. Footnotes, 6 notes, and 34 references. (Author abstract modified)