On the 'General Acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of experts

S. Kassin, A. Tubb, H. M. Hosch, Amina Memon

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    256 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the cross-race bias, weapon focus, the accuracy-confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)405-416
    Number of pages11
    JournalAmerican Psychologist
    Volume56
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2001

    Keywords

    • BIASED LINEUP PROCEDURES
    • CONFIDENCE
    • IDENTIFICATION
    • ACCURACY
    • MEMORY
    • SUGGESTIVENESS
    • PERCEPTIONS
    • SAFEGUARD
    • FAIRNESS
    • FEEDBACK

    Cite this

    On the 'General Acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of experts. / Kassin, S.; Tubb, A.; Hosch, H. M.; Memon, Amina.

    In: American Psychologist, Vol. 56, 2001, p. 405-416.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Kassin, S. ; Tubb, A. ; Hosch, H. M. ; Memon, Amina. / On the 'General Acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of experts. In: American Psychologist. 2001 ; Vol. 56. pp. 405-416.
    @article{295b42390e7841e0b764c41cdf4283a7,
    title = "On the 'General Acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of experts",
    abstract = "In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80{\%}, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the cross-race bias, weapon focus, the accuracy-confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community.",
    keywords = "BIASED LINEUP PROCEDURES, CONFIDENCE, IDENTIFICATION, ACCURACY, MEMORY, SUGGESTIVENESS, PERCEPTIONS, SAFEGUARD, FAIRNESS, FEEDBACK",
    author = "S. Kassin and A. Tubb and Hosch, {H. M.} and Amina Memon",
    year = "2001",
    doi = "10.1037/0003-066X.56.5.405",
    language = "English",
    volume = "56",
    pages = "405--416",
    journal = "American Psychologist",
    issn = "0003-066X",
    publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - On the 'General Acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of experts

    AU - Kassin, S.

    AU - Tubb, A.

    AU - Hosch, H. M.

    AU - Memon, Amina

    PY - 2001

    Y1 - 2001

    N2 - In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the cross-race bias, weapon focus, the accuracy-confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community.

    AB - In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the cross-race bias, weapon focus, the accuracy-confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community.

    KW - BIASED LINEUP PROCEDURES

    KW - CONFIDENCE

    KW - IDENTIFICATION

    KW - ACCURACY

    KW - MEMORY

    KW - SUGGESTIVENESS

    KW - PERCEPTIONS

    KW - SAFEGUARD

    KW - FAIRNESS

    KW - FEEDBACK

    U2 - 10.1037/0003-066X.56.5.405

    DO - 10.1037/0003-066X.56.5.405

    M3 - Article

    VL - 56

    SP - 405

    EP - 416

    JO - American Psychologist

    JF - American Psychologist

    SN - 0003-066X

    ER -