Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Law Hum Behav. 2009 Jun;33(3):225-36. doi: 10.1007/s10979-008-9134-z. Epub 2008 Jul 3.

The impact of eyewitness expert evidence and judicial instruction on juror ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony.

Author information

  • 1School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, NSW, Australia. k.martire@unsw.edu.au

Abstract

It has been argued that psychologists should provide expert evidence to help jurors discriminate between accurate and inaccurate eyewitness identifications. In this article we compare the effects of judicial instruction with expert evidence that is either congruent or incongruent with the ground truth, focusing on juror ability to evaluate "real" eyewitness evidence. In contrast to studies which have employed "fictional" eyewitness designs, we found no appreciable effect of either congruent or incongruent expert evidence on participant-juror sensitivity to eyewitness accuracy. We discuss the role of methodology on the inferences and conclusions that can be made regarding the impact of eyewitness expert evidence.

PMID:
18597165
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Springer
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk