The alibi‐generation effect: Alibi‐generation experience influences alibi evaluation

Purpose. Post‐conviction DNA exonerations demonstrate a failure of alibis to protect innocent suspects. We contend one reason alibis are not believed is because evaluators underestimate how difficult it is for an innocent person to generate a convincing alibi. We hypothesized that asking evaluators to first generate an alibi of their own would lead evaluators to consider a suspect's alibi as more believable. Methods. Participants (N= 147) were randomly assigned to either evaluate a suspect's alibi before generating their own alibi (evaluate‐first) or generate their own alibi before evaluating the suspect's alibi (generate‐first). Participants provided alibis from either 3 days previous or 30 days previous. In Experiment 2, participants (N= 255) were randomly assigned to either generate‐first, evaluate‐first, or read‐experience (in which they read about alibi‐generation difficulty) conditions. Half the participants were primed to think empathetically with Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) subscales, and half were not. All participants evaluated the believability of the suspect's alibi as well as their own alibis. Results. Across both experiments, participants who generated their own alibi first rated the suspect's alibi as more believable. This alibi‐generation effect overshadowed alibi latency in Experiment 1 and the empathy manipulation in Experiment 2. Conclusions. Alibi‐generation experience seems to change the expectations evaluators have of alibis from criminal suspects. This effect likely emanates from increased awareness that alibis are difficult for innocent people to generate and from the emotional experience of having difficulty generating alibis.