Perceptions and credibility: Understanding the Nuances of eyewitness testimony

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 183-203

  Shermer, Lauren O'Neill ^a   Rose, Karen C ^a   Hoffman, Ashley ^a  

^a WIDENER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

eyewitness testimony; jury decision making; types of evidence

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955917572     PISSN: 10439862     EISSN: 15525406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1043986211405886     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Brewer, N., & Burke, A. (2002). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 353-364.
2. Brigham, J.C. (1990). Target person distinctiveness and attractiveness as moderator variables in the confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identifications. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 101-115.
3. Brigham, J.C., & WolfsKeil, M.P. (1983). Opinions of attorneys and law enforcement personnel on the accuracy of eyewitness identifications. Law and Human Behavior, 7, 337-349.
4. CBS News. (1998, May). CBS News Monthly Poll #1 (ICPSR02547-v2) [Computer file]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2009-09-25. doi:10.3886/ICPSR02547.
5. Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., & McEwen, T. (1996, June). Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/dnaevid.pdf.
6. Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Dexter, H.R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
7. Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Dexter, H.R. (1989). The eyewitness, the expert psychologist, and the jury. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 311-332.
8. Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Stuve, T.E. (1988). Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12(1), 41-55.
9. Dann, B., Hans, V., & Kaye, D. (2005). Testing the effects of selected jury trial innovations on juror comprehension of contested mtDNA evidence (Report No. 211000). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. (ICPSR No. 4356).
10. Doyle, J.M. (2001). Discounting the error costs: Cross-racial false alarms in the culture of contemporary criminal justice. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 253-262.
11. Elliott, R. (1993). Expert testimony about eyewitness identification: A critique. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 423-437.
12. Ferdico, J.N., Fradella, H.F., & Totten, C. (2008). Criminal procedure for the criminal justice professional (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage.
13. Ferensic v. Birkett, 451 F. Supp. 2d 874 (E.D. Mich. 2006).
14. Fradella, H.F. (2006). Why judges should admit expert testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. Federal Courts Law Review, 2006(3), 2-29.
15. Fradella, H.F., Fogarty, A., & O'Neill, L. (2003). The impact of Daubert on the admissibility of behavioral science testimony. Pepperdine Law Review, 30, 403-444.
16. Fradella, H.F., O'Neill, L., & Fogarty, A. (2004). The impact of Daubert on the forensic sciences. Pepperdine Law Review, 31, 323-361.
17. Freund, R.J., & Wilson, W.J. (1998). Regression analysis: Statistical modeling of a response variable. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
18. Gibeaut, J. (1997). Confidence boost. ABA Journal, 83, 26.
19. Goldstein, A.G., Chance, J.E., & Schneller, G.R. (1989). Frequency of eyewitness identification in criminal cases: A survey of prosecutors. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 71-74.
20. Gross, S.R., Jacoby, K., Matheson, D.J., Montgomery, N., & Patil, S. (2004). Exonerations in the United States 1989-2003. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 95, 523-560.
21. Herrmann, D.J., Crawford, M., & Holdsworth, M. (1992). Gender-linked differences in everyday memory performance. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 221-231.
22. Hosch, H.M., Beck, E.L., & McIntyre, P. (1980). Influence of expert testimony regarding eyewitness accuracy on jury decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 287-296.
23. Innocence Project. (2011). Know the cases. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from http://www.innocenceproject.org.
24. Kleider, H.M., & Goldinger, S.D. (2001). Stereotyping ricochet: Complex effects of racial distinctiveness on identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 605-627.
25. Lipton, J.P. (1977). On the psychology of eyewitness testimony. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 90-95.
26. Loftus, E.F. (1981). Eyewitness testimony: Psychological research and legal thought. Crime and Justice, 3, 105-151.
27. Loftus, E.F., Banaji, M.R., Schooler, J.W., & Foster, R.A. (1987). Who remembers what? Gender differences in memory. Michigan Quarterly Review, 26, 64-85.
28. Loftus, E.F., O'Toole, T.P., & Easterly, C.F. (n.d.). Juror understanding of eyewitness testimony: A survey of 1000 potential jurors in the District of Columbia. Retrieved from http://www.pdsdc.org/Resources/SLD/PDS%20Poll%20-%20Juror%20Knowledge%20of%20Eyewitness%20Factors%20-%20article%20by%20Dr.%20Elizabeth%20Loftus%20and%20Tim%20O'Toole.pdf.
29. Lounsberry, E. (2010, June 22). New Jersey report calls for assessing eyewitnesses' validity. Philadelphia Inquirer., p. A1.
30. Mangussen, S., Melinder, A., Stridbeck, U., & Raja, A.Q. (2010). Beliefs about factors affecting the reliability of eyewitness testimony: A comparison of judges, jurors and the general public. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 122-133.
31. Manson v. Braithwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 114 (1977).
32. Martire, K.A., & Kemp, R.I. (2009). The impact of eyewitness expert evidence and judicial instruction on juror ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 225-236. doi:10.1007/s10979-008-9134-z.
33. Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972).
34. Neubauer, D.W., & Fradella, H.F. (2010). America's courts and the criminal justice system (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/ Cengage.
35. O'Toole, T.P., & Shaym G. (2006). Manson v. Brathwaite revisited: Towards a new rule of decision for due process challenges to eyewitness identification procedures. Valparaiso University Law Review, 41, 109-148.
36. Penrod, S.D., Loftus, E.F., & Winkler, J.D. (1982). The reliability of eyewitness testimony: A psychological perspective. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the court-room (pp. 119-168). New York, NY: Academic Press.
37. Pozzulo, J.D., & Lindsay, R.C.L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 549-570.
38. Sarno, J.A., & Alley, T.R. (1997). Attractiveness and the memorability of faces: Only a matter of distinctiveness? American Journal of Psychology, 110, 81-92.
39. Schmechel, R.S., O'Toole, T.P., Easterly, C., & Loftus, E.F. (2006). Beyond the ken? Testing jurors' understanding of eyewitness reliability evidence. Jurimetrics, 46, 177-214.
40. Sporer, S.L. (2001). Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 36-97.
41. State v. Clopten, 223 P.3d 1103 (Utah 2009).
42. United States v. Smith, 621 F. Supp. 2d 1207 (M.D. Ala. 2009).
43. Wells, G.L., Lindsay, R.C., & Ferguson, T.J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440-448.
44. Wells, G.L., & Quinlivan, D.S. (2009). Suggestive eyewitness identification procedures and the Supreme Court's reliability test in light of eyewitness science: 30 years later. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 1-24.