Norwegian judges' knowledge of factors affecting eyewitness testimony: a 12-year follow-up.
estimator variables
eyewitness testimony
judges
survey
system variables
Journal
Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
ISSN: 1321-8719
Titre abrégé: Psychiatr Psychol Law
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9433511
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
entrez:
16
5
2022
pubmed:
7
12
2020
medline:
7
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Eyewitness evidence often plays a critical role in decisions made in the criminal justice system. To evaluate eyewitness testimony accurately, judges must be aware of factors that can contaminate this type of evidence. In 2008, a survey of judges in Norway revealed a lack of awareness of several factors that affect eyewitness testimony. In the current study, a survey was administered to Norwegian judges (N=98) to evaluate their knowledge of factors that affect eyewitness testimony. Results showed that judges' overall knowledge scores were similar to those reported in 2008, but substantial increases and decreases in knowledge were observed for specific factors. Additional analyses indicated that increased uncertainty regarding some eyewitness factors led to a decline in accuracy when compared to responses observed in 2008. The current study provides an updated assessment of judges' knowledge of eyewitness factors and highlights the need for more comprehensive training for judges regarding these factors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35571598
doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1837028
pii: 1837028
pmc: PMC9103262
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
665-682Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.
Références
Law Hum Behav. 2011 Jun;35(3):200-10
pubmed: 20461542
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018 May;13(3):324-335
pubmed: 29716454
Behav Sci Law. 2016 Jul;34(4):580-94
pubmed: 27417874
J Appl Psychol. 2004 Aug;89(4):722-9
pubmed: 15327357
Front Psychiatry. 2014 Aug 13;5:102
pubmed: 25165459
Psychol Sci. 2014 Feb;25(2):519-30
pubmed: 24335599
Behav Sci Law. 2005;23(5):709-27
pubmed: 16170786
Behav Sci Law. 2013 Sep-Oct;31(5):637-51
pubmed: 24000168
Psychol Sci. 2014 Oct;25(10):1964-6
pubmed: 25134717
J Appl Psychol. 2000 Aug;85(4):574-86
pubmed: 10948802
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 09;10(12):e0142695
pubmed: 26650237
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Nov;14(6):1072-1095
pubmed: 31584864
Am Psychol. 2001 May;56(5):405-16
pubmed: 11355363
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 01;11(2):e0148116
pubmed: 26828933
Memory. 2021 Jul;29(6):823-828
pubmed: 30295132
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2006;2:469-98
pubmed: 17716079
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2013 Mar;19(1):55-71
pubmed: 23544475
Front Psychiatry. 2013 May 16;4:28
pubmed: 23720639
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2017 May;18(1):10-65
pubmed: 28395650
Law Hum Behav. 2004 Dec;28(6):687-706
pubmed: 15732653
Law Hum Behav. 2012 Dec;36(6):513-26
pubmed: 22353048
Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63:539-69
pubmed: 21838546