证人的目击面孔心理重建及认知检测

提取目击证人对犯罪嫌疑人的面孔记忆是一项困难的工作,由于证人在识记面孔时有多种影响因素,在提取和再认记忆时又会有各种认知因素的影响,导致面孔心理重建的失真。因此,从认知心理学和实验心理学的角度入手,分析影响心理重建的因素,并用最佳的手段提取记忆,可以使面孔重建的可靠性最大化。认知相关电位在记忆检测领域的日臻完善,使目击证人的再认正确与否有了可靠的参照,从记忆反应的脑电图形分析,可以有效判断证人对列队辨认中的面孔是否存有记忆。     

目击证人错误记忆的影响因素研究综述

目击证人对犯罪嫌疑人辨认的结果是定案的重要依据,但目击证人的错误记忆产生的不当陈述又是案件错判的最常见原因,提高目击证人辨认的准确性对于惩罚犯罪和保障公民的权利至关重要。目击证人受外界环境、主观心理等多方面的作用,形成错误记忆,严重影响辨认的准确性。因此,应当借鉴认知心理学对错误记忆的研究方法,抑制错误记忆对目击证人的影响因素,提高目击证人辨认结果的准确性。     

陈述记忆画像浅谈

陈述记忆画像是通过目击证人对案犯面貌形象的回忆刻划,目前世界上许多国家在这项技术的运用上有很多成功的经验。笔者在办案过程中体会到陈述记忆画像的制作虽有难度,但关键在制作画像过程中体会目击证人的心理。 1 目击证人的记忆是画像的首要条件 记忆是视觉、感觉、知觉、想象、思维等因素的综合,目击证人的记忆通常分为两种情况:一种是有意识的记忆,另一种是无意识的记忆,在进行画像工作时必须要深入现场了解情况,分析目击证人记忆的由来及形成过程的可靠性,科学地反映出罪犯的真实面貌特征。     

目击证人辨认研究综述

研究目击证人辨认具有重要的理论意义与实践意义。本文重点介绍了影响目击证人辨认准确性的因素,即估计者变量和系统变量,并分析了目击证人辨认研究的现存问题。     

目击证人辨认研究综述

研究目击证人辨认具有重要的理论意义与实践意义.本文重点介绍了影响目击证人辨认准确性的因素,即估计者变量和系统变量,并分析了目击证人辨认研究的现存问题.     

目击证人辨认研究综述

研究目击证人辨认具有重要的理论意义与实践意义.本文重点介绍了影响目击证人辨认准确性的因素,即估计者变量和系统变量,并分析了目击证人辨认研究的现存问题.     

目击证人辨认研究综述

研究目击证人辨认具有重要的理论意义与实践意义.本文重点介绍了影响目击证人辨认准确性的因素,即估计者变量和系统变量,并分析了目击证人辨认研究的现存问题.     

美国证人心理学研究进展

证人心理研究对于司法审判具有重要意义,是法律心理学的重要组成部分。美国近十年来在影响证人证词的心理因素、改善证人记忆及儿童证人与专家证人心理等方面的研究有了一定进展,这些研究对于我国证人心理研究具有借鉴价值。     

目击证人错误辨认的立法防范——英国《1984年警察与刑事证据法·守则D》解读

现代心理学研究结果表明,由于各种因素的影响,目击证人的证言有时并不准确.为了防止目击证人错误辨认可能带来的消极后果.英国<1984年警察与刑事证据法·守则D>在吸收心理学最新研究成果的基础上,不定期进行修改,从而最大程度地确保目击证人辨认结果的可靠性.2008年重新修订后的<守则D>从限制主持辨认的警官资格、减少辨认程序本身固有的暗示性、控制事后信息、保障犯罪嫌疑人权利行使等角度作了科学、细致的规定,对于预防和减少目击证人的错误辨认具有重要意义.     

悬赏目击证人和职业目击证人引发的法社会学思考

悬赏目击证人和职业目击证人的现象在我国现实社会中的产生,既有法律上的原因,也有深刻的社会根源:从法律上看,我国证人证言法律制度的缺陷导致大部分证人不敢、不愿作证,这为两种法律现象的产生提供了前提;从社会根源上观察,无讼意识、权利义务观念的缺失、"经济人"的形成及就业压力的剧增,是这两种现象产生的最深层次的原因。     

The role of deception in P300 memory detection

Purpose. P300 memory detection test is a neuroscientific procedure to assess memories stored in the brain. P300 memory detection can and is currently applied to assess criminal suspects on recognition of critical crime information. Contrasting memory detection with lie detection, researchers have argued that P300 memory detection does not involve deception. We empirically investigated this argument by manipulating deception between groups. Methods. Thirty‐four community volunteers participated in a P300 memory detection test, answering either deceptively (deceptive condition) or truthfully (truth condition) to their own name. Results. P300 memory detection was significant in the truth condition, indicating that deceptive responding is not a prerequisite for valid P300 memory detection. However, there were clear indications that deceptive responding improved memory detection. Conclusions. Deception seems involved in the P300 memory detection test; and deceptive responding may add to test accuracy.     

Accuracy of eyewitness identification is significantly associated with performance on a standardized test of face recognition

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the relationship between Eyewitness Accuracy regarding a person met under conditions of high stress and performance on a standardized, neutral test of memory for human faces. METHOD: Fifty-three U.S. Army personnel were exposed to interrogation stress. Forty-eight hours later, participants were administered the Weschler Face Test and then asked to identify the one interrogator who they had encountered 48 h earlier. RESULTS: A significant positive relationship was observed between performance on the Weschler Face Test and performance on the Eyewitness task. Inaccurate eyewitnesses exhibited more False Negative errors when performing the Weschler Face Test. DISCUSSION: Trait ability to remember human faces may be related to how accurately people recall faces that are associated with highly emotional circumstances. Detection probability methods, such as ROC curve analyses, may be of assistance to forensic examiners, the police, and the courts, when assessing the probability that eyewitness evidence is accurate.     

Eyewitness identification procedures for multiple perpetrator crimes: a survey of police in Sweden,Belgium, and the Netherlands

ABSTRACT

A considerable proportion of crimes involve multiple perpetrators. Yet, little is known about how police officers construct, administer, and record eyewitness identification procedures for multiple suspects. An online survey of law enforcement agents in Sweden, Belgium, and the Netherlands (N?=?51) was conducted to obtain an initial understanding of police perceptions of prevalence and characteristics of multiple perpetrator crimes, and to examine identification procedure practices given the little to no guidance provided for police. Practice converged when it came to the use of sequential, photographic lineups, but diverged between and within countries on whether or not suspects of multiple perpetrator crimes should be placed in separate lineups. Results specifically highlight contextual cuing as one critical area for future research in identification for multiple perpetrator crimes (i.e. placing multiple suspects in the same lineup or asking eyewitnesses to look for a specific suspect).     

犯罪心理测试反测试及其对策

犯罪心理测试技术是在甄别嫌疑人过程中使用的测谎方法.但由于测试中的原理机制等问题,反测试手段可以以多种方式对测过程和测试结果进行干扰.加强犯罪心理测试中的监控并提高反测试识别技术,可以较好地应对测试中出现的反测试.反测试的出现本身就是逃避测试的表现,一旦发现被测人存在反测试行为或心理,则应重点对其进行调查.随着新技术的发展,脑电测试结合测谎范式进行检测有了一定的研究基础,为今后的测谎方式提供了更多的选择.     

Are individuals' familiarity judgments diagnostic of prior contact?

The extensive eyewitness memory research literature has been restricted to memory for strangers. Although it is often assumed that eyewitnesses are more accurate identifying familiar than unfamiliar individuals, little is known about whether individuals' familiarity judgments are diagnostic of prior contact. Caucasian and Asian sophomores (N=139) in two small private high schools viewed yearbook pictures of (a) graduated students from their school who were seniors (fourth year) when participants were freshmen (first year) (familiar) and (b) unfamiliar individuals, and responded whether each was ‘familiar’. The design was completely crossed; familiar faces at each school served as unfamiliar faces at the other school. Based on d′ data, the cross-race effect resulted for familiarity judgments. Also, although individuals' familiarity judgments were diagnostic of prior contact, accuracy was low (mean hit rate=0.42; mean false alarm rate=0.23), rendering an eyewitness's report of having seen a perpetrator casually in the past of limited forensic value.     

颅脑损伤患者智能和记忆损害的相关因素研究

目的探讨交通事故所致颅脑损伤伤者的智能和记忆损害及相关因素。方法 统计分析成都市1999年1月1日至2001年12月31日间因交通事故造成颅脑损伤的652例伤者的心理测验、脑电图及脑影像学资料。结果研究组平均智商为77.85±15.97,27.9％的伤者智商低于70;51.9％的记忆商低于51。智力损害与文化程度、左颞叶损伤、≥3个脑叶损伤以及脑电图异常明显相关;记忆损害与文化程度、损伤和鉴定检查的间隔时间、脑于损伤、左颞叶损伤、脑电图异常明显相关。结论交通事故造成颅脑损伤的伤者多有不同程度的智力和记忆损害,且与左颞叶损伤、脑电图异常、文化程度、脑干损伤等因素有关。     

Forced confabulation more strongly influences event memory if suggestions are other‐generated than self‐generated

Purpose. Virtually all eyewitnesses to a crime, who eventually testify in court, are interviewed by police officers at least once. How do these interviews affect what the eyewitnesses are subsequently likely to report? The purpose of this study is to compare the relative impact of self‐ versus other‐generated misinformation on confabulated memory about an event. Self‐generated misinformation can occur by encouraging eyewitnesses to guess or speculate about possible answers to questions about which they report having no memory. Other‐generated misinformation can occur by having an investigator suggest an answer to an eyewitness. Methods. After viewing a 5 minutes crime video, participants answered written questions. One week later these same questions were answered again. We specifically focused on individuals' answers to unanswerable questions that probed information not actually presented in the video. If a participant answered an unanswerable question, we know that their answer was confabulated because the information was not presented in the video. Results. If an answer to an unanswerable question was forced confabulated at time 1, that answer was more likely to be repeated at time 2 if it had been other‐generated (suggested in the question) rather than self‐generated (fabricated by the participant). Conclusions. Pressuring eyewitnesses to answer questions about an event, when they indicate that they do not know the answer, can result in false confabulations. Answers suggested by the investigator are more likely to be repeated later than are answers that are simply self‐generated or speculated by the eyewitness. These results are consistent with the reality monitoring framework and ‘recollect‐to‐reject’ metacognitive reasoning strategies.     

Judging guilt and accuracy: highly confident eyewitnesses are discounted when they provide featural justifications

Jurors are heavily swayed by confident eyewitnesses. Are they also influenced by how eyewitnesses justify their level of confidence? Here we document a counter-intuitive effect: when eyewitnesses identified a suspect from a lineup with absolute certainty (‘I am completely confident’) and justified their confidence by referring to a visible feature of the accused (‘I remember his nose’), participants judged the suspect as less likely to be guilty than when eyewitnesses identified a suspect with absolute certainty but offered an unobservable justification (‘I would never forget him’) or no justification at all. Moreover, people perceive an eyewitness’s identification as nearly 25% less accurate when the eyewitness has provided a featural justification than an unobservable justification or simply no justification. Even when an eyewitness’s level of confidence is clear because s/he has expressed it numerically (e.g. ‘I am 100% certain’) participants perceive eyewitnesses as not credible (i.e. inaccurate) when the eyewitness has provided a featural justification. However, the effect of featural justifications – relative to a confidence statement only – is maximal when there is an accompanying lineup of faces, moderate when there is a single face and minimal when there is no face at all. The results support our Perceived-Diagnosticity account.