Mock jurors' perceptions of identifications made by intoxicated eyewitnesses

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 191-210

  Evans, Jacqueline Renee ^a   Compo, Nadja Schreiber ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

^b FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Credibility; Identification accuracy; Juror decision making; Rape; Witness evidence

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951178194     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160802612890     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abbey, A. (2002). Alcohol-related sexual assault: A common problem among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, S14, 118-S128.
2. Abroms, B.D., Gottlob, L.R., & Fillmore, M.T. (2006). Alcohol effects on inhibitory control of attention: Distinguishing between intentional and automatic mechanisms. Psychopharmacology, 188, 324-334.
3. Adams, S.L., & McNeil, D.W. (1991). Negative alcohol expectancies reconsidered. Psychology of Addictive Behavior, 5, 9-14.
4. Aramburu, B., & Leigh, B.C. (1991). For better or worse: Attributions about drunken aggression toward male and female victims. Violence and Victims, 6, 31-41.
5. Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
6. Benton, T.R., Ross, D.F., Bradshaw, E., Thomas, W.N., & Bradshaw, G.S. (2006). Eyewitness memory is still not common sense: Comparing jurors, judges and law enforcement to eyewitness experts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 115-129.
7. Borjesson, W.I., & Dunn, M.E. (2001). Alcohol expectancies of women and men in relation to alcohol use and perceptions of the effects of alcohol on the opposite sex. Addictive Behaviors, 26, 707-719.
8. Bornstein, B.H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
9. Bray, R.M., & Kerr, N.L. (1979). Use of the simulation method in the study of jury behavior. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 107-119.
10. Bray, R.M., & Kerr, N.L. (1982). Methodological issues in the study of the psychology of the courtroom. In N.L. Kerr, & R.M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom (pp. 287-323). New York: Academic Press.
11. Brewer, N., & Hupfeld, R.M. (2004). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and witness group identity on mock-juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 493-513.
12. Brigham, J.C., & Bothwell, R.K. (1983). The ability of prospective jurors to estimate the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. Law and Human Behavior, 7, 19-30.
13. Carli, L.L. (1999). Cognitive reconstruction, hindsight, and reactions to victims and perpetrators. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 966-979.
14. Critchlow, B. (1985). The blame in the bottle: Attributions about drunken behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 258-274.
15. Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Stuve, T.E. (1988). Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41-55.
16. Devenport, J.L., Penrod, S.D., & Cutler, B.L. (1997). Eyewitness identification evidence: Evaluating commonsense evaluations. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 338-361.
17. Dillehay, R.D., & Nietzel, M.T. (1980). Constructing a science of jury behavior. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (pp. 246-264). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
18. Dillehay, R.D., & Nietzel, M.T. (1981). Conceptualizing mock jury juror research: Critique and illustrations. In K. Larsen (Ed.), Psychology and ideology. Monmouth, OR: Institute for Theoretical History.
19. Dysart, J.A., Lindsay, R.C.L., MacDonald, T.K., & Wicke, C. (2002). The intoxicated witness: Effects of alcohol on identification accuracy from showups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,170-175.
20. Evans, J.R., & Schreiber, N. (March, 2007). Intoxicated witness and victims of crime: How common are they? Poster presented at Off the Witness Stand: Using Psychology in the Practice of Justice, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York City.
21. Fillmore, M.T., Vogel-Sprott, M., & Gavrilescu, D. (1999). Alcohol effects on intentional behavior: Dissociating controlled and automatic influences. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 7, 372-378.
22. Fischer, G.J. (1991). Cognitive predictors of not-guilty verdicts in a simulated acquaintance rape trial. Psychological Reports, 68, 1199-1206.
23. George, W., Gournic, S., & McAfee, M. (1988). Perceptions of postdrinking female sexuality: Effects of gender, beverage choice, and drink payment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18,1295-1317.
24. George, W.H., Lehman, G.L., Cue, K.L., Martinez, L.J., Lopez, P.A., & Norris, J. (1997). Postdrinking sexual inferences: Evidence for linear rather than curvilinear dosage effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 629-648.
25. George, W.H., & McAfee, M.P. (1987). The effects of gender and drinking experience on alcohol expectancies about self and male versus female other. Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 133-144.
26. Goodwin, D.W., Othmer, E., Halikas, J.A., & Freemon, F. (1970). Loss of short term memory as a predictor of the alcoholic 'blackout'. Nature, 227, 201-202.
27. Gosling, S.D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O.P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93-104.
28. Grattan-Miscio, K.E., & Vogel-Sprott, M. (2005). Effects of alcohol and performance incentives on immediate working memory. Psychopharmacology, 181, 188-196.
29. Gudjonsson, G.H., Clare, I., Rutter, S., & Pearse, J. (1993). Persons at Risk During Interviews in Police Custody: The Identification of Vulnerabilities, The Royal Commission on Criminal Justice, Research Study No. 12. London: HMSO.
30. Hammock, G.S., & Richardson, D.R. (1997). Perceptions of rape: The influence of closeness of relationship, intoxication, and sex of participant. Violence and Victims, 12, 237-246.
31. Hosch, H., & Cooper, D. (1982). Victimization as a determinant of eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 649-652.
32. Hosch, H., Leippe, M., Marchioni, P., & Cooper, D. (1984). Victimization, self-monitoring, and eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 280-288.
33. Josephs, R.A., & Steele, C.M. (1990). The two faces of alcohol myopia: Attentional mediation of psychological stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99, 115-126.
34. Kassin, S. (1984). Eyewitness identification: Victims versus bystanders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 519-529.
35. Kassin, S.M., Tubb, V.A., Hosch, H.M., & Memon, A. (2001). On the 'general acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
36. Kerr, N.L., & Bray, R.M. (2005). Simulation, realism, and the study of the jury. In N. Brewer, & K. Willams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 322-364). New York: Guilford Press.
37. Kirchner, T.R., & Sayette, M.A. (2003). Effects of alcohol on controlled and automatic. processes. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11, 167-175.
38. Klippenstine, M.A., Schuller, R.A., & Wall, A. (2007). Perceptions of sexual assault: The expression of gender differences and the impact of target alcohol consumption. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 2620-2641.
39. Knowles, S.K.Z., & Duka, T. (2004). Does alcohol affect memory for emotional and non-emotional experiences in different ways? Behavioral Pharmacology, 15, 111-121.
40. Leigh, B.C. (1987). Beliefs about the effects of alcohol on self and others. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48, 467-475.
41. Leigh, B.C., & Aramburu, B. (1994). Responsibility attributions for drunken behavior: The role of expectancy violation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 115-135.
42. Lindsay, R.C.L. (1994). Expectations of eyewitness performance: Jurors verdicts do not follow their beliefs. In D. Ross, J. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Adult Eyewitness Testimony (pp. 362-384). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. Loftus, E.F. (1974). Reconstructing memory: The incredible eyewitness. Psychology Today, 8, 116-119.
44. Loftus, E.F. (1979). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
45. Loftus, E.F. (1986). Experimental psychologist as advocate or impartial educator. Law and Human Behavior, 10, 63-78.
46. MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.
47. MacDonald, T.K., Fong, G.T., Zanna, M.P., & Martineau, A.M. (2000). Alcohol myopia and condom use: Can alcohol intoxication be associated with more prudent behavior? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 605-619.
48. McClelland, G. (2000). Nasty data: Unruly, ill-mannered observations can ruin your analysis. In H. Reis, & C. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 393-411). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. McGraw, K.O., Tew, M.D., & Williams, J.E. (2000). The integrity of web-delivered experiments: Can you trust the data? Psychological Science, 11, 502-506.
50. Mohler-Kuo, M., Dowdall, G.W., Koss, M., & Wechsler, H. (2004). Correlates of rape while intoxicated in a national sample of college women. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 65, 37-45.
51. Monahan, J.L., & Lanutti, P.J. (2000). Alcohol as social lubricant. Alcohol myopia theory, social self-esteem, and social interaction. Human CommunicationResearch, 26, 175-202.
52. Moulton, P.L., Petros, T.V., Apostal, K.J., Park, R.V., Ronning, E.A., King, B.M. et al. (2005). Alcohol-induced impairment and enhancement of memory: A test of the interference theory. Physiology & Behavior, 85, 240-245.
53. National Institute of Justice (2003). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics (31st edn). Washington, DC: Author.
54. Nunez, N., McCoy, M.L., Clark, H.L., & Shaw, L.A. (1999). The testimony of elderly victim/ witnesses and their impact on juror decisions: The importance of examining multiple stereotypes. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 413-423.
55. Office of Applied Studies. (2002, 11 April). The NHSDA Report: Binge drinking among underage persons. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration.
56. Office of Applied Studies. (2003). Results from the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National findings (DHHS Publication No. SMA 03-3836, NHSDA Series H 22). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
57. Office of Applied Studies. (2005). Results from the 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings. Retrieved 16 February 2007, from http://oas.samhsa.gov/nsduh/ 2k5nsduh/2k5results.htm#Ch3
58. Ogloff, J.R.P. (2000). Two steps forward and one step backward: The law and psychology movement(s) in the 20th century. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 1-8.
59. O'Neil, K.M. (2002). Web-based experimental research in psychology and law: Methodological variables that may affect dropout rates, sample characteristics, and verdicts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
60. O'Neil, K.M., & Penrod, S.D. (2001). Methodological variables in web-based research than may affect results: Sample type, monetary incentives, and personal information. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 33, 226-233.
61. O'Neil, K.M., & Penrod, S.D. (2002). Jury research meets the World-Wide Web: Assessing the impact of research methods on substantive findings. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, Columbus, OH.
62. O'Neil, K.M., Penrod, S.D., & Bornstein, B.H. (2003). Web-based research: Methodological variables' effects on dropout and sample characteristics. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 217-226.
63. Petros, T., Kerbel, N., Beckwith, B., Sachs, G., & Sarafolean, M. (1985). The effects of alcohol on prose memory. Physiology & Behavior, 35, 43-46.
64. Ray, S., Bates, M.E., & Ely, B.M. (2004). Alcohol's dissociation of implicit and explicit memory processes: Implications of a parallel distributed processing model of semantic priming. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 12, 118-125.
65. Read, D.J., Yuille, J.C., & Tollestrup, P. (1992). Recollections of a robbery: Effects of arousal and alcohol upon recall and person identification. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 425-446.
66. Richardson, D., & Campbell, J.L. (1982). Alcohol and rape: The effect of alcohol on attributions of blame for rape. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 468-476.
67. Rohsenow, D.J. (1983). Drinking habits and expectancies about alcohol's effects on self versus others. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 752-756.
68. Ruva, C.L., & Bryant, J.B. (2004). The impact of age, speech style, and question format on perceptions of witness credibility and trial outcome. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34,1919-1944.
69. Salminen, S. (1992). Defensive attributions hypothesis and serious occupational accidents. Psychological Reports, 70, 1195-1199.
70. Schuller, R.A., & Wall, A. (1998). The effects of defendant and complainant intoxication on mock jurors' judgments of sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 555-573.
71. Shaver, K.G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101-113.
72. Smith, M.A., & Leigh, B. (1997). Virtual subjects: Using the internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 29, 496-505.
73. Southwick, L., Steele, C., Marlatt, G., & Lindell, M. (1981). Alcohol-related expectancies: Defined by phase of intoxication and drinking experience. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 713-721.
74. Steele, C.M., & Josephs, R.A. (1990). Alcohol myopia: Its prized and dangerous effects. American Psychologist, 45, 921-933.
75. Summers, G., & Feldman, N.S. (1984). Blaming the victim versus blaming the perpetrator: Attributional analyses of spousal abuse. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 8, 189-187.
76. Thorton, R. (1992). Repression and its mediating influence on the defensive attribution of responsibility. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 44-57.
77. Thorton, R. (1984). Defensive attribution of responsibility: Evidence for an arousal based motivational bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 721-734.
78. Tracy, J.I., & Bates, M.E. (1999). The selective effects of alcohol on automatic and effortful memory processes. Neuropsychology, 13, 282-290.
79. Wall, A., & Schuller, R.A. (2000). Sexual assault and defendant/victim intoxication: Jurors' perceptions of guilt. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 253-274.
80. Wells, G.L. (1984). How adequate is human intuition for judging eyewitness testimony? In G.L. Wells, & E.F. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives (pp. 256-272). New York: Cambridge University Press.
81. Wenger, A.A., & Bornstein, B.H. (2006). The effects of victim's substance use and relationship closeness on mock jurors' judgments in an acquaintance rape case. Sex Roles, 54, 547-555.
82. Yuille, J.C. (Ed.). (1986). Police selection and training: the role of psychology. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
83. Yuille, J.C., & Tollestrup, P.A. (1990). Some effects of alcohol on eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 268-273.