Abstract
Two experiments were conducted to test whether post-identification feedback affects evaluations of eyewitnesses. In Experiment
1 (N = 156), evaluators viewed eyewitness testimony. They evaluated witnesses who received confirming post-identification feedback
as more accurate and more confident, among other judgments, compared with witnesses who received disconfirming post-identification
feedback or no feedback. This pattern persisted regardless of whether the witness’s confidence statement was included in the
testimony. In Experiment 2 (N = 161), witness evaluators viewed the actual identification procedure in which feedback was delivered. Instructions to disregard
the feedback were manipulated. Again, witnesses who received confirming feedback were assessed more positively. This pattern
occurred even when witness evaluators received instructions to disregard the feedback. These experiments are the first to
confirm researchers’ assumptions that feedback effects on witnesses translate to changes in judgments of those witnesses.
1 (N = 156), evaluators viewed eyewitness testimony. They evaluated witnesses who received confirming post-identification feedback
as more accurate and more confident, among other judgments, compared with witnesses who received disconfirming post-identification
feedback or no feedback. This pattern persisted regardless of whether the witness’s confidence statement was included in the
testimony. In Experiment 2 (N = 161), witness evaluators viewed the actual identification procedure in which feedback was delivered. Instructions to disregard
the feedback were manipulated. Again, witnesses who received confirming feedback were assessed more positively. This pattern
occurred even when witness evaluators received instructions to disregard the feedback. These experiments are the first to
confirm researchers’ assumptions that feedback effects on witnesses translate to changes in judgments of those witnesses.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Category Original Article
- DOI 10.1007/s10979-009-9189-5
- Authors
- Amy Bradfield Douglass, Bates College Department of Psychology 4 Andrews Road Lewiston ME 04240 USA
- Jeffrey S. Neuschatz, University of Alabama Huntsville AL USA
- Jennifer Imrich, Bates College Department of Psychology 4 Andrews Road Lewiston ME 04240 USA
- Miranda Wilkinson, University of Alabama Huntsville AL USA
- Journal Law and Human Behavior
- Online ISSN 1573-661X
- Print ISSN 0147-7307
- Journal Volume Volume 34
- Journal Issue Volume 34, Number 4 / August, [...]