Eyewitness Testimony Research

Eyewitness testimonies are based on a person’s ability to recall what took place accurately. Memory research has proven that a person’s memory is not a recording but it is reconstructive. Loftus and Palmer’s study set out to prove that the memory could be reconstructed through the use of language.

As time goes on, eyewitness testimony has become more and more of a disputed topic due to many different factors. The first study I was exposed to was in an introductory psychology class which sparked my interest into the topic. For this reason, I chose to look at different demographics such as, gender and major, and see if those factors had any impact on the perception of eyewitness testimony. My main issues remained the same throughout this research project.

Professor Farris, eyewitness evidence is not perfect; however, law enforcement agencies still use lineups, show-ups, and photographic arrays today. The professionals have taken a closer look at eyewitness evidence, precisely at the effectiveness of identifying suspects from lineups and photographic arrays. Law enforcement officers in the United States investigate millions of crimes per year; considering, a percentage of law enforcement agencies investigate crimes that involve the use of police arranged identification procedures. "The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has initiated a multisite field experiment of eyewitness evidence to examine the effectiveness and the accuracy of the crucial and influential component of the Nation's Criminal

According to the article “Expert testimony: Does eyewitness memory research have probative value for the courts?”, “…eyewitness identifications are the single most common cause of wrongful convictions” even though compared to actual confessions, “eyewitness testimony has been described as the most incriminating evidence that can be introduced against the accused” (Yarmey, 2001). While even though eyewitness testimony can lead to false accusations, it is still considered to be a necessary source of evidence in a crime case. A statistic provided by Christine Mumma, Dwayne Allen Dail’s lawyer, supports the liability of eyewitness testimony, stating that “Misidentification is the leading factor in wrongful conviction across the country…it’s present in 75 percent of wrongful convictions” (Mumma, 2009). Inaccurate eyewitness testimonies are not just simple memory slips of the brain, as they can unfairly affect the lives of innocent

There are various places that we could possibly end up working in as a clinical forensic psychologist, like in a courtroom as an expert witness, conducting psychological assessments, working child custody cases, a jury consultant, we could work in a jail or prison, work with law enforcement, in hospitals, work for a government agency, or treating client’s office, all of which are settings that can be comprised of a great deal of diversity.

As “Articulate a Question Your Research Will Answer” states, “A good research question should be simple, be focused, and require more than a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer” (334). For this reason, I've decided to change my topic to the issue of memory malleability, and propose the research question, under what circumstances is eyewitness testimony hearsay?

Of course, eyewitness testimonies are not always unreliable and often can be crucial in correctly identifying the perpetrator of the crime, thus these premises and conclusion are not to be taken at face value, but as a way to conceptualize bad bias from eyewitness testimony. Mistaken eyewitness testimony causes a large amount of bad bias by shifting focus onto one specific defendant. With all the focus on one defendant, many cognitive biases come into play, such as confirmation bias and belief perseverance. If a witness passionately claims that someone committed the crime, investigators are likely to mold evidence to fit the case against that defendant, instead of identifying an alternative suspect who

The use of the eyewitness testimony has always been viewed as one of the most reliable forms of evidence when it comes to the court system. Recently many cases have been brought up where the use of the eyewitness testimony has failed and put an innocent citizen into jail leaving the criminal on the loose and a threat to the population. This has caused eyewitness testimony to go from a reliable source to a controversial subject for many. The eyewitness testimony should not be used because memory is corrupted after a certain length of time, interviews push eyewitnesses to identify a subject, and lineups further confuse the witness.

Eyewitness testimonies is evidence given by people who have witnessed an event, such as a robbery. Eyewitness testimonies are useful as they can be used to help identify a criminal and lower the amount of suspects who are included. Police and similar services can use eyewitnesses to narrow down their searches by asking a series of questions about what they have witnessed and also what they believe the suspect looked like, eyewitnesses can also help give information about the actual crime itself and therefore give police more knowledge on the crime. The advantages of an eyewitness are obvious, they can help give

In the end of a court case, there is guilty and innocent. Sometimes the guilty is judged accordingly, other times the innocent is judged guilty. Eyewitness testimony gives details about what happened, identification of perpetrators. Eyewitness can be the central focus of the whole investigation, and is also heavily focused on and powerful in the courtroom. Hence, eyewitness testimony is largely one of the reasons as to why innocent individuals are thrown in prison. Although generally without a doubt, eyewitness testimony is helpful to the court and investigation, but memory alone is not always reliable. That previous statement was not meaning to convict all eyewitness testimony, but it is just common sense to understand that not all eyewitness testimony is accurate or true. Eyewitness testimony must be evaluated before allowing witnesses to be put into a courtroom because there are many aspects as to why eyewitness testimony is not sincere or reliable.

Eye witnesses can be vital to an investigation of a crime such as a robbery or mass

Eyewitness Testimony Elizabeth Loftus has conducted many studies on eyewitness testimony (EWT). In 1974 she worked with John Palmer to look at the ways that memory can be distorted. The studies general aim was to explore the accuracy of memory after witnessing a car accident. In particular it was to find out if leading questions distort the accuracy of eyewitness’s immediate recall.

Eyewitness may have huge impact on the court decision. Witness testimony only relies on human memory. The memory of witness is very important not only in criminals identification but in civil cases as well. For instance, in car accident, eyewitness testimony plays great role in determining who is in fault. In many cases eyewitness played crucial role in court's outcomes. But there is also great risks of relying only on witness identification because, in fact, human memory is far from perfect or in another word permanent. Forgetfulness of human life is a natural fact.

My ID number for this study was 400602 and I was part of the control group. On the first day I had 8 hits, 2 missed 0 false alarms and 10 correct rejections. The second day I scored approximately the same with 9 hits, 1 miss, 1 false alarm and 9 correct rejections. My first composite score was .95 and then .944 on the second day.

Witness testimonies a very powerful tool that can make help the jury members to make their final decision. The witness that most competent is one that is a family member, a spouse, close friend, co-worker, or a neighbor. In essence, witnesses that daily interact with the defendant. Those people with personal connections with the defendant will be able to best testify any strange behavior, (verbal or nonverbal) the defendant exude. For instance, if the defendant wife was murder 3 days ago and he was seen clubbing and flirting with other women, that would constitute inappropriate behavior and would raise some questions among his inner circle. This behavior seems strange because the defendant wife just died so naturally he