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.     

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。     

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.     

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。     

职业目击证人作证是否合法

职业目击证人未被主流社会认可，但社会需求又得以使其有一定的生存环境，职业目击证人专门为当事人提供目击证据，并收取“好处费”，他们是否具有证人资格，其证言可否作为定案的依据?     

“职业目击证人”引发的法社会学反思

南京“职业目击证人”的出现引发了众多讨论。从现行法律规定来看,这类以获利为目的的“证人”是具有证人资格的,他们收取报酬也不违背有关法律规定。这类证人的出现固然是由于我国证人法律规则的某些缺漏,但更深层次的社会根源是市场经济体制下中国社会发生的一些变化,如熟人社会向陌生人社会的转变、“经济人”意识在人们头脑中的觉醒以及经济体制改革所带来的下岗压力。     

“职业目击证人”引发的法社会学思考

南京“职业目击证人”的出现引发了众多讨论。从现行法律规定来看，这类以获利为目的的“证人”是具有证人资格的，他们收取报酬也不违背有关法律的规定。这类证人的出现固然是由于我国现行证人制度存在某些缺漏，但更深层次的社会根源是市场经济体制下中国社会发生的一些变化，如熟人社会向陌生人社会的转变，“经济人“意识在人们头脑中的觉醒以及经济体制改革所带来的下岗压力。     

最后的目击证人出庭：泣血寻踪天堂哥哥含笑长眠

内退法官李明摔倒在妻弟韦军餐厅的葡萄架下伤重身亡。噩耗传来,其胞弟李林综合种种蛛丝马迹怀疑哥哥之死另有隐情,更令他生疑的是当天事发现场所有的证人都奇怪地消失了。就在李林绝望之际,意外获知当天一个前来餐厅的菜贩目睹了哥哥惨死的全过程。可是,这个“最后的目击证人”因惧怕被报复,始终不愿出庭作证。     

Regularities in Eyewitness Identification

What do eyewitness identification experiments typically show? We address this question through a meta-analysis of 94 comparisons between target-present and target-absent lineups. The analyses showed that: (a) correct identifications and correct-nonidentifications were uncorrelated, (b) suspect identifications were more diagnostic with respect to the suspect’s guilt or innocence than any other response, (c) nonidentifications were diagnostic of the suspect’s innocence, (d) the diagnosticity of foil identifications depended on lineup composition, and (e) don’t know responses were nondiagnostic with respect to guilt or innocence. Results of diagnosticity analyses for simultaneous and sequential lineups varied for full-sample versus direct-comparison analyses. Diagnosticity patterns also varied as a function of lineup composition. Theoretical, forensic, and legal implications are discussed.     

Eyewitness Identification Accuracy and Response Latency

Eyewitness identification research has reliably shown that accurate identifications are faster than inaccurate identifications. Recently, D. Dunning and S. Perretta (2002) claimed that an identification latency of 10-12 s not only best discriminates between accurate and inaccurate identifications but also produces extremely high accuracy rates, approaching 90%. Consistent with predictions from recognition memory theory, however, we show that the optimum time boundary varies with overall response latency under manipulations of retention interval and nominal lineup size, and that the accuracy rate inside the optimum time boundary is much less impressive than previously reported. We outline directions for clarifying the accuracy and latency relationship to assist the reliable diagnosis of identification accuracy.     

Eyewitness Identification Procedures: The Fifth Rule

Law and Human Behavior -     

Effects of Experiencing the Eyewitness Identification Procedure on Juror Decisions

Mistaken eyewitness identifications are believed to contribute to a preponderance of wrongful convictions, underscoring the need to identify methods to help decrease the likelihood of false convictions based on eyewitness testimony. The present study tested the hypothesis that providing jurors with first-hand experience with eyewitness identification procedures could help further sensitize them to the limitations of eyewitness testimony. Eighty college students watched a videotaped mock trial in which the prosecution’s sole evidence was eyewitness testimony. In a 2 × 2 randomized factorial design, we manipulated whether participants heard expert psychological testimony (henceforth referred to as expert testimony) on the limitations of eyewitness identification and whether they experienced an eyewitness identification procedure. As predicted, experiencing the eyewitness identification procedure had a significant impact on juror decisions, suggesting that this procedure could further help reduce the likelihood of wrongful convictions.     

目击者指证规则中的若干问题

如何防范因目击者指证错误导致的无辜者被定罪,是一个世界性难题。美国所有的冤假错案中,半数以上是由目击者指证错误所造成的。心理学的研究结果证实,指证形成过程中的任何阶段都有可能出现差错。美国防范指证错误的主要措施有:以成列指证、照片指证为原则,暴露指证为例外;以律师的在场帮助权约束侦查机关的暗示性指证;庭审辨认时引入指证专家的意见;在采信指证结论时适用“本身排除”和“总体情况权衡”规则。我国即将出台的证据法应该借鉴美国防范指证错误的一些措施,以规范我国的指证实践。     

Investigating Investigators: Examining the Impact of Eyewitness Identification Evidence on Student-Investigators

This research examined the impact of eyewitness identification decisions on student-investigators. Undergraduates played the role of police investigators and interviewed student-witnesses who had been shown either a good or poor view of the perpetrator in a videotaped crime. Based on information obtained from the witness, student-investigators then chose a suspect from a database containing information about potential suspects and rated the probability that their suspect was the culprit. Investigators then administered a photo lineup to witnesses, and re-rated the probability that their suspect was guilty. Student-investigators were highly influenced by eyewitness identification decisions, typically overestimating the information gained from the identification decision (except under conditions that led witnesses to be very accurate), and were generally unable to differentiate between accurate and inaccurate witnesses.