Abstract

Eyewitness testimony has as long history in the court system, and is very persuasive to juries. Jurors are hard pressed to ignore a witness' assertion of a perpetrator's identity. However, the juror's perception of eyewitness testimony is problematic as it has been documented as inaccurate and unreliable in numerous experiments. With the advent of DNA testing and efforts such as The Innocence Project, it has become apparent that faulty eyewitness accounts are central to many wrongful convictions. The intent of this thesis was to explore how law enforcement can facilitate more accurate eyewitness accounts via their interview process. Research suggests that a key problem in the current interviewing system is "post-event information," or outside information introduced by leading questions, exposure to police conversations or other witnesses' accounts. This information can contaminate a witness's memories of events and lead them to report things they did not see. The current experiment explores the effects of 1) warning and educating witnesses about suggestibility and 2) interviewing with leading or open-ended questions. Accuracy scores were then compared for each condition. The hope was to gain insight into methods for improving accurate recall of events and reducing memory contamination from "post-event information."

Notes

If this is your Honors thesis, and want to learn how to access it or for more information about readership statistics, contact us at STARS@ucf.edu

Thesis Completion

2011

Semester

Fall

Advisor

Chin, Matthew

Degree

Bachelor of Science (B.S.)

College

College of Sciences

Degree Program

Psychology

Subjects

Dissertations, Academic -- Sciences;Sciences -- Dissertations, Academic

Format

PDF

Identifier

CFH0004116

Language

English

Access Status

Open Access

Length of Campus-only Access

None

Document Type

Honors in the Major Thesis

Download

Included in

Psychology Commons

Share

COinS