 |
American Justice System
by andrew sandon
http://www.professays.com
Over the past twenty years, psychologists have conducted a
great deal of research on the phenomenon of eyewitness
identification. Many laypersons believe that human memory
works like a videocassette recorder (Brigham and Bothwell,
1983, p. 18). In essence, we remember what we see and can
reproduce those recollections when needed. Psychological
studies indicate, however, that memory is really a complex
process consisting of three stages: (1) acquisition, (2)
retention, and (3) retrieval. In each of these stages,
various factors can alter a witness's perception of an
event and render it unreliable (Brigham and Bothwell, 1983,
p. 20).
The acquisition stage covers the witness's perception of
the original event (Loftus, 1981, p. 105). Factors in this
stage fall into two categories: event factors and witness
factors. As their names imply, these factors describe the
circumstances surrounding the event and the witness,
respectively. An event factor is something inherent in an
incident which affects one's ability to perceive it
accurately. One event factor is the duration of the event.
In general, the reliability of an eyewitness identification
diminishes as the viewing time decreases (Loftus, 1981, p.
105). For example, the woman, who saw the robber for over
thirty seconds, was in a better position to make a reliable
identification than the man who saw the robber for a much
shorter period of time.
A witness factor is a factor inherent in a witness which
affects that person's ability to perceive (Loftus, 1981, p.
110). For instance, the woman may have felt stress and fear
because an unknown man accosted her on a deserted street
late at night. This stress may have affected her ability to
process information about the man even before he actually
became outwardly violent. The effect of stress on
identification depends upon the level of stress. At low
levels of stress, a witness is inattentive to many details
and not likely to be accurate (Wells, 1988, p. 17). At
moderate levels, memory improves, because a witness is
better able to focus. At high levels, it becomes difficult
for a person to concentrate and store the details of an
event. Indeed, when one is concerned with self-
preservation, there is a tendency to ignore anything not
necessary for survival. The retention stage spans the
interval between the occurrence of the event and the
recollection of information about it. Accuracy in
identification decreases as this interval increases
(Lipton, 1977, p. 90). It is also important to know what
happened during the retention interval. Certain activities,
such as viewing "mug shots" or answering leading questions,
can affect one's memory by suggesting an interpretation of
the event. Indeed, witnesses may accept this information,
whether true or false, and incorporate it into their memory
(Lipton, 1977, p. 90).
In the retrieval stage, the witness recalls the retained
information. Psychologists have found that a witness's
recollection depends on even subtle distinctions in the
questions one asks (Lipton, 1977, p. 94). For example, a
question using a definite article (e.g., "Did you see the
red car?") elicits more "yes" answers than does a question
employing an indefinite article (e.g., "Did you see a red
car?"), even when the question refers to an element not
actually present in the event. Likewise, a change in a
question's wording can affect the substance of a witness's
response through the power of suggestion. The
question, "How tall was he?," will likely produce a
different answer from the substantively identical
question, "How short was he?" Thus, the wording of
questions at retrieval can be critical to ensuring accurate
recollection.
In contrast, there is no significant correlation between a
witness's confidence and his or her accuracy in
identification. In one study, psychologist Gary L. Wells
tested the correlation between confidence and accuracy in
the context of an attorney briefing a witness. Wells found
that both accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses who were
briefed by an attorney regarding the delivery of their
testimony were more confident in their presentation than
those who did not receive the briefing (Wells, 1988, p.
88). In fact, the inaccurate eyewitnesses gained more
confidence than the accurate eyewitnesses as a result of
the briefing.
~Therefore, the accuracy of an eyewitness
identification depends on how the event was acquired,
retained, and recalled. Accordingly, a jury should consider
several factors in judging the accuracy of an eyewitness
identification. Social science data suggests, however, that
jurors are unaware of several scientific principles
affecting eyewitness identifications. Moreover, even when
they are aware of such principles, jurors are unable to
apply them when making a decision. Indeed, most jurors
simply assume that eyewitness identifications are
infallible. Therefore, jurors should use expert testimony
about eyewitness identification as well as appreciate and
apply the appropriate scientific principles in specific
cases.
Produced by ProfEssays ( www.professays.com ) -
professional custom essays writing service: essays, term
and academic papers, compositions, book reports. No
plagiarism, high quality, prompt delivery.
Submit An Article
|
|  |
