Mock-juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses

In response to lawyers' critiques of earlier staged-crime, mock-jury studies, 16 eyewitnesses to a staged crime were videotaped while being questioned by lawyers in a real courthouse. Accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses were questioned by experienced or inexperienced lawyers for the prosecution and defense. Subsequently, 178 University of Alberta undergraduates served as mock-jurors and attempted to detect the accuracy of the witnesses based on their taped testimony. As in the previous research, the overall rate of belief was quite high (69%), and the subjects believed the testimony of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses at about the same rate (68% vs. 70%, respectively). Lawyers' experience failed to influence verdict. Confidence of the eyewitness was significantly related to belief of their testimony. The data replicate the previous findings and demonstrate that lack of expertise of the questioners does not account for the failure to detect eyewitness accuracy in this paradigm.The authors wish to thank 36 lawyers and senior law students from the Kingston area who donated their time. The research was supported by a grant to the first author from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.     

Adults’ Judgments of Children's Coached Reports

This study investigated adults’ judgments of the honesty of children's coached true and fabricated mock testimony. Adults saw video clips of children testifying in a mock court about a true or fabricated event in their lives. They were asked to make an assessment of the truthfulness of the testimony, and respond to questions about their perception of children's credibility. Half of the adults saw children testifying after a competence examination, and the other half saw children testifying without a competence examination. Overall, girls were rated as more competent than boys, and their testimony was more likely to be believed. Younger children were more likely to be rated as incompetent than older children. A factor analysis of adults’ responses revealed six factors which significantly predicted adults’ overall assessment of children's credibility, and their evaluations of children's competence to testify. Adults’ detection accuracy was at chance, with the majority of children rated as truthful. Viewing the competency examination and cross-examination did not improve the adults’ detection accuracy. However, seeing the cross-examination made adults’ less likely to believe children's testimony. The implications of these results for the judicial system are discussed.