Increased realism in eyewitness confidence judgements: The effect of dyadic collaboration

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 545-561

  Allwood, Carl Martin ^a   Granhag, Pär Anders ^b   Johansson, Marcus ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CALIBRATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COOPERATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INDIVIDUALIZATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEMORY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VIDEORECORDING; WITNESS;

EID: 8744266412     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.888     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Allwood CM, Björhag C-G. 1990. Are two judges better than one? On the realism in confidence judgements by pairs and individuals. In Cognitive Biases, Caverni J-P, Fabre J-M, Gonzalez M (eds). Elsevier Science Publishers BV (North-Holland Publishing Company): Amsterdam; 443-463.
2. Allwood CM, Granhag PA. 1996a. Realism in confidence judgements as a function of working in dyads or alone. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66: 277-289.
3. Allwood CM, Granhag PA. 1996b. Considering the knowledge you have: effects on realism in confidence judgements. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 8: 235-256.
4. Allwood CM, Granhag PA. 1996c. The effects of arguments on realism in confidence judgements. Acta Psychologica 91: 99-119.
5. Andersson J. 1996. Two Is One Too Many: Dyadic Memory Collaboration Effects on Encoding and Retrieval of Episodes. Linköpings Studies in Education and Psychology No. 47. PhD thesis in psychology, Department of Education and Psychology, Linköping University, Sweden.
6. Andersson J, Rönnberg JR. 1995. Recall suffers from collaboration: joint recall effects of friendship and task complexity. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9: 199-211.
7. Andersson J, Rönnberg JR. 1996. Collaboration and memory: effects of dyadic retrieval on different memory tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology 10: 171-181.
8. Bothwell RK, Deffenbacher KA, Brigham JC. 1987. Correlation of eyewitness accuracy and confidence: optimality hypothesis revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology 72: 691-695.
9. Cutler BL, Penrod SD. 1989. Moderator of the confidence-accuracy correlation in face recognition: the role of information processing and base-rates. Applied Cognitive Psychology 3: 95-107.
10. Geen R, Shea JDC. 1997. Social motivation and culture. In Motivation and Culture, Munro D, Schumaker JF, Carr SC (eds). Routledge: New York; 33-48.
11. Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U, Klenbölting H. 1991. Probabilistic mental models: a Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review 98: 506-528.
12. Gigone D, Hastie R. 1997. Proper analysis of the accuracy of group judgements. Psychological Bulletin 121: 149-167.
13. Granhag PA. 1997. Realism in eyewitness confidence as a function of type of event witnessed and repeated recall. Journal of Applied Psychology 82: 599-613.
14. Granhag PA, Jonsson A-C, Allwood CM. in press. The Cognitive Interview and its effect on witnesses' confidence. Psychology, Crime & Law.
15. Granhag PA, Strömwall LA, Allwood CM. 2000. Effects of reiteration, hindsight bias, and memory on realism in eyewitnesses' confidence. Applied Cognitive Psychology 14: 397-420.
16. Juslin P, Olsson N, Winman A. 1996. Calibration and diagnosticity of confidence in eyewitness identification: comments on what can be inferred from the low confidence-accuracy correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22: 1304-1316.
17. Juslin P, Winman A, Olsson H. 2000. Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: a critical examination of the hard - easy effect. Psychological Review 107: 384-396.
18. Kaplan MF, Miller CE. 1983. Group discussion and judgement. In Basic Group Processes, Paulus PB (ed.). Springer-Verlag: New York; 65-94.
19. Koriat A, Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B. 1980. Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 6: 107-118.
20. Leippe MR. 1980. Effects of integrative memorial and cognitive processes on the correspondence of eyewitness accuracy and confidence. Law and Human Behavior 4: 261-274.
21. Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B. 1977. Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 20: 159-183.
22. Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B, Phillips LD. 1982. Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art of 1980. In Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 306-334.
23. Luus CAE, Wells GL. 1994. The malleability of eyewitness confidence: co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology 79: 714-723.
24. Mendell PR, Hitch GJ, Kirby P. 1992. Are two heads better than one? Experimental investigations of the social facilitation of memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology 6: 525-543.
25. Penrod S, Cutler B. 1995. Witness confidence and witness accuracy: assessing their forensic relation. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 4: 817-845.
26. Perfect TJ, Hollins TS. 1996. Predictive feeling of knowing judgements and postdictive confidence judgements in eyewitness memory and general knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology 10: 371-392.
27. Perfect TJ, Watson EL, Wagstaff GF. 1993. Accuracy of confidence ratings associated with general knowledge and eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Psychology 78: 144-147.
28. Read JD, Lindsay DS, Nicholls T. 1998. The relation between confidence and accuracy in eyewitness identification studies. In Eyewitness Memory: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives, Thompson CP, Hermann DJ, Read JD, Bruce D, Payne DG, Toglia MP (eds). Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ; 107-130.
29. Shaw JS, III. 1996. Increases in eyewitness confidence resulting from postevent questioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2: 126-146.
30. Shaw JS, III, McClure KA. 1996. Repeated postevent questioning can lead to elevated levels of eyewitness confidence. Law and Human Behavior 6: 629-653.
31. Smith VL, Kassin SM, Ellsworth PC. 1989. Eyewitness accuracy and confidence: within- versus between-subjects correlations. Journal of Applied Psychology 74: 356-359.
32. Snyder M, Stukas AA. 1999. Interpersonal processes: the interplay of cognitive, motivational and behavioral activities in social interactions. Annual Review of Psychology 50: 273-303.
33. Sporer SL, Penrod S, Read D, Cutler B. 1995. Choosing, confidence, and accuracy: a meta-analysis of the confidence - accuracy relation in eyewitness identification studies. Psychological Bulletin 118: 315-327.
34. Stephenson GM, Wagner W. 1989. Origins of the misplaced confidence effect in collaborative recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology 3: 227-236.
35. Stephenson GM, Brandstatter H, Wagner W. 1983. An experimental study of social performance and delay on the testimonial validity of story recall. European Journal of Social Psychology 13: 175-191.
36. Treadwell JR, Nelson TO. 1996. Availability of information and the aggregation of confidence in prior decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68: 13-27.
37. Weingardt KR, Leonesio RJ, Loftus EF. 1994. Viewing eyewitness research from a metacognitive perspective. In Metacognition: Knowing about Knowing, Metcalfe J, Shimamura AP (eds). MIT Press: Cambridge, MA; 157-184.
38. Wells GL, Bradfield AL. 1999. Distortions in eyewitnesses' recollections: can the postidentification-feedback effect be moderated? Psychological Science 10: 138-144.
39. Wells GL, Lindsay RCL, Ferguson TJ. 1979. Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology 64: 440-448.
40. Wells GL, Murray DM. 1984. Eyewitness confidence. In Eyewitness Testimony: Psychological Perspectives, Wells GL, Loftus EF (eds). Cambridge University Press: New York; 155-170.
41. Wells GL, Malpass RS, Lindsay RCL, Fisher RP, Turtle JW, Fulero SM. 2000. From the lab to the police station: a successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist 55: 581-598.