Site icon Eminence Papers

Research Strategy – Eyewitness Testimony

Perkins

Research Strategy – Eyewitness Testimony

Introduction

Eyewitnesses are essential in the criminal justice system because they help solve crimes. In some instances, eyewitness testimony is the only evidence that can be used to determine the identity of a crime perpetrator. Eyewitness testimony is a type of direct evidence that may be regarded as valuable for forensic reasons. Law enforcement agencies consider an eyewitness’s testimony putative if there is no other crucial evidence. Completely false or incorrect eyewitness testimony can negatively impact the process of ensuring that crime victims get justice. Remembering the events of a crime is mainly a cognitive process influenced by internal and external factors that an individual may not be able to control. Internal factors are biological and psychological factors such as attention, age, stress level, motivation, health condition, skill, prior experience, prejudice, confidence, cognitive state, suggestive questioning, level of certainty, and personal bias. Confidence and contextual information have the most impact on eyewitness decision-making. External factors are also known as environmental factors, including duration and time of exposure, lighting conditions, weapons, and distance. This research focuses on establishing the impact of internal and external factors on eyewitness testimony.

Thesis

Eyewitness testimony is essential in any justice system because it aids in collecting information from events that have occurred. Eye witness testimony is also one of the most compelling pieces of evidence that may be used in criminal prosecution. However, complexities have arisen, attempting to cast doubt on the validity of eyewitness reports, claiming that far too many assumptions are made when such statements are accepted as accurate in a criminal justice process. Indeed, these difficulties highlight the reality that eyewitnesses are often involved in criminal justice system blunders that are lethal. Scientists and psychologists have investigated various factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. The main factors that have been explored are the characteristics of the eyewitness, the testimony, and the witnessed event. This research will focus on establishing the connection between personal attributes, external and internal factors, and eyewitness testimony accuracy.

Hypothesis

The research hypothesizes that the accuracy of eyewitness testimony makes it possible to predict if specific personal attributes are known.

Measurement and Analysis

Existing knowledge about the problems associated with eyewitness testimony is derived from real-world observations and simulations made in laboratory conditions. Understanding the quantity and quality of eyewitness testimony requires investigating real-world situations. However, it is usually difficult to gather objective knowledge of how events occurred. We will, therefore, use simulated events recorded on videotapes. We will watch videos of previous eyewitness interviews to determine the impact of external factors such as lighting, the number of interviewees, and the visibility of officers’ firearms on the confidence level. We will also interview people with a history of providing eyewitness testimony to determine the factors that affected their testimony.

In addition, we will maintain a qualitative research strategy throughout the research. This strategy includes collecting, analyzing, and interpreting non-statistical data. This strategy differs from the quantitative research strategy, which includes collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data. Besides the type of data in the two research strategies, another difference is that in qualitative research, things are described in words. In contrast, in quantitative analysis, things are counted or measured.

Research Questions

Literature Review

According to McLeod (2009), eyewitness testimony is the account provided by individuals of an event they witnessed. It requires the eyewitness to give a detailed recollection of a crime. The description may involve information on how the crime occurred, the perpetrator who committed the crime, and any other details that could help investigators get a clear picture of what happened. Despite the critical role of eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system, most law enforcement bodies are reluctant to apply the testimony in analyzing a crime and apprehending the suspects involved in the crime due to various psychological factors that limit the accuracy of the testimony. The factors include reconstructive memory, stress or anxiety, weapon focus, and leading questions. McLeod (2009) argues that the impact of stress or anxiety is affected by whether there are existing cases of real-life recall where an anxious or stressed eyewitness’ memory is accurate even if it may occur some months after the crime and whether there are misleading questions that may have impacted the eyewitness testimony. The impact of reconstructive memory is founded on the assumption that people store information based on how it makes sense to them by trying to fit into schemas that dictate how information is organized. Schemas can distort unconsciously inappropriate or unfamiliar information to fit in with an individual’s existing knowledge. Individuals may also reconstruct their memory based on personal beliefs, hence affecting the accuracy of their testimony McLeod (, 2009). Weapon focus occurs when an eyewitness concentrates on the weapon and excludes other crime details. On the other hand, leading questions suggest how the crime was committed, thus impacting an eyewitness’s recollection of the incident. Rick (2015) emphasizes the need to combine eyewitness testimony with forensic evidence. He agrees with McLeod (2009) that eyewitness testimony may not be accurate due to psychological factors affecting memory. The findings agree with the research of Wise et al. (2009), which indicates that eyewitness testimony is affected by the nature of human memory. The authors argue that eyewitness memory does not contain the level of certainty that investigators look for to resolve a crime because it is often affected by the eyewitness’ beliefs, expectations, attitudes, and recollection of similar events.

Giving an eyewitness testimony requires convincing the law enforcement officers that the information in the testimony is correct. In most instances, eyewitnesses may not have the confidence to recall how the crime occurred, especially if the crime involved dangerous people. Eyewitnesses may also withhold information because they are not sure whether it is accurate or not, thus creating a correlation between eyewitness testimony and confidence levels. Rick (2015) argues that high confidence levels may result in inaccurate information because the eyewitness is already convinced that their recollection of the crime is correct, while low confidence level may make the eyewitness omit important information about a crime because they are not sure whether what they intend to say is correct. In most instances, high confidence levels occur if an eyewitness knows that their testimony matches that of other witnesses. In contrast, low confidence levels are caused by leading questions that may confuse the eyewitness and make him or her follow the narrative suggested by an investigator. According to Smalarz & Gary (2014), post-identification feedback is a leading cause of changes in eyewitness confidence levels and is attributed to the impairment of an evaluator’s ability to discriminate between mistaken and accurate feedback. According to Smalarz & Gary (2014), an investigator’s statement after a witness’s choice to identify a suspect may compromise the witness’s capacity to do the right thing. For instance, feedback suggesting that eyewitnesses correctly identified a crime perpetrator from a lineup may affect their answers in other interviews because they are already confident that the person they identified committed the crime. They may end up giving false information, such as a wrong description of the perpetrator.

The impact of psychological factors on eyewitness testimony is also emphasized by Sporer et al. (2014). The author argues that law enforcement officers need to view witnesses’ statements based on a psychological perspective. They argue that besides the presence of a weapon and stress levels, eyewitness testimony is also affected by influence after the fact, pressure to choose, cross-racial identification, multiple perpetrators, transference, and confidence level. The authors agree that eyewitnesses who demonstrate high confidence levels in identifying crime perpetrators are less accurate compared to those who admit that they are not sure about the identity of the perpetrator. The findings agree with the arguments made by Wise et al. (2009) that assuring eyewitnesses that the information they have provided increases their confidence level, thus increasing the likelihood of providing inaccurate information. In assessing the impact of cross-racial identification, the authors argue that eyewitnesses are less accurate when identifying a person from a different race. The authors also argue that pressure to choose affects eyewitness testimony because eyewitnesses are less likely to make mistakes when they are under pressure to identify a crime perpetrator, even though they are told that they do not have to make a choice. Influence after the fact occurs when an eyewitness is more likely to make mistakes when they remember events with other individuals who also witnessed the crime. In such instances, the eyewitness may change his or her memories to agree with others. Transference affects eyewitness testimony when eyewitnesses make a mistaken identification because they identify the individual from a different occasion. According to Sporer et al. (2014), identification accuracy also decreases when there are multiple perpetrators. The authors also identify age as one of the factors affecting eyewitness testimony. According to the author, age affects memory, hence affecting the accuracy of the eyewitness testimony given by older people. Older people are also highly likely to give in to the pressure from investigators to identify a specific individual as the crime perpetrator through leading questions, hence limiting the accuracy of their statement.

Wise et al. (2009) suggest that there are specific techniques that can be used to analyze the accuracy of the testimony given by eyewitnesses. According to the authors, the techniques consider the impacts of eyewitness error, including the nature of human memory, eyewitness bias, hindsight bias, source monitoring errors, and eyewitness confidence levels. According to the authors, hindsight bias occurs due to the knowledge of how an event occurred, thus affecting an individual’s recollection of the event and his or her memory of what was on their mind when the crime occurred. Therefore, when an eyewitness learns that a perpetrator has been identified and will be tried for the crime in question, the information changes their memory of the crime and what the eyewitness recalls about the crime. The authors argue that it is, therefore, essential for attorneys and judges to know how to accurately evaluate the accuracy of the testimony being considered to determine whether a person is guilty or not. They propose different steps that can be followed to analyze eyewitness testimony accuracy. The first step is evaluating the interviews between law enforcement officers and eyewitnesses. This step includes determining whether the interviews acquired the maximum amount of information from the eyewitness, whether the interview contaminated the eyewitness’ memory of the crime or the perpetrator, and whether the identification approaches, interviews, the prosecutor, other witnesses, the media, or other factors had a significant impact in increasing the eyewitness’ confidence level before taking a statement of their confidence in the accuracy of their identification.

The second step is evaluating the identification approaches and identification accuracy. The step involves determining whether the eyewitness interview was biased and whether the bias was related to information about the identity or description of the perpetrator. The step also includes determining whether there was an unusual circumstance overcoming the presumptive inaccuracy of the identification and whether there was valid-reliable corroborating evidence that establishes the eyewitness testimony’s veracity. The other thing considered in this step is whether the eyewitness identification approaches and interviews were impartial and fair or whether any exceptions of biased identification and interviews were applied. The third step is evaluating the eyewitness factors evident during the crime. The steps include determining the eyewitness factors during the crime that likely enhanced the accuracy of the testimony and identification and those that decreased accuracy. The final step is a conclusion that includes four sections. The first section determines whether there was a maximum amount of information gathered from the eyewitnesses during the interview. The second section determines whether there was a statement of the eyewitness’ confidence level in the accuracy of their identification obtained before the eyewitness received feedback. The third section is determining whether there was a low or high probability that the eyewitness’ testimony was accurate. The fourth section is determining whether there was a medium, high or low probability that the eyewitness identification was accurate.

Existing research has focused on the psychological factors affecting eyewitness testimony. Most researchers have focused on factors such as stress levels, confidence, and a weapon’s presence. There is still limited research on the impact of eyewitness bias, the nature of eyewitness memory, hindsight bias, and cross-racial identification. There is also limited research on the impact of the eyewitness’ interview environment on the accuracy of their testimony. This research will fill these gaps by reviewing the impact of the external environment on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony, the relationship between eyewitness memory and the accuracy of their testimony, the impact of bias on eyewitness testimony, and the factors that contribute to false eyewitness testimonies. The information from our additional research will complement existing studies by providing additional information on the factors affecting the accuracy of eyewitness testimony and the measures that law enforcement officers and professionals in the criminal justice system can take to enhance the effectiveness of eyewitness testimony. The information from our findings can also be used by policymakers in the law enforcement sector to design policies that protect eyewitnesses, such as factors in their external environment, thus improving the accuracy of their testimony.

Ethical Standards

One of the measures that will be taken to maintain ethical standards is seeking consent from research participants. All participants will be required to sign a consent form before the research begins. The consent form will include what the researcher expects from the participants. The researcher will also inform participants that they can withdraw their participation at any time because the questions asked may bring up bad memories, especially if the participant witnessed a gruesome crime or a family member or friend was hurt during the crime. The second measure will ensure that all study participants are adults to avoid inflicting trauma on children who may not have strong emotional stability compared to adults. The researcher will also ensure that the videotapes used in the research are accessed legally and that the sources are informed that the tapes are being used in the research.

Conclusion

Eyewitnesses play a vital role in the criminal justice system, which is why it is crucial to understand the factors that could affect the accuracy of their testimony. Therefore, this research will help law enforcement officers understand the adjustments they need to make when talking to eyewitnesses to increase their confidence and prompt them to provide accurate information. The research will also enlighten criminal justice personnel on how they can predict the accuracy of an eyewitness’s testimony based on their behavior and confidence level.

References

McLeod, S. (2009, April 16). Eyewitness Testimony. Retrieved November 08, 2022, from Simply Psychology: http://www.simplypsychology.org/eyewitness-testimony.html

Rick, S. M. (2015). Eye Witness Testimony. Massachusetts: Salem Press Encyclopedia

Smalarz, L., & Gary, W. (2014). Post-Identification Feedback to Eyewitnesses Impairs Evaluators’ Abilities to Discriminate Between Accurate and Mistaken Testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 38 (2), 194-202.

Sporer, S. L., Malpass, R. S., & Koehnken, G. (2014). Psychological issues in eyewitness identification. London: Psychology Press.

Wise, R. A., Fishman, C. S., & Safer, M. A. (2009). How to analyze the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in a criminal case. Conn. L. Rev., 42, 435.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question 

Eyewitness Testimony

Transform your IP3 draft into your final IP5 paper. The annotated bibliography in your IP3 paper must be transformed or changed into a “literature review” in your IP5 paper. Here is everything you need to know to successfully submit your final IP5 research proposal:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dTqqVvPRpRG9e-1830YRcheNyBVofwMt/view?usp=sharing

Below are administrative recommendations that should be applied to your final IP5 paper. Keep up the good work.

HYPOTHESIS: The hypothesis is confusing to read. What are “personal attributes”? (3.5 points)

General Comments: This assignment is supposed to produce an edited rough draft of the body of a proposed research paper. It should present a clear focus on the problems – and provide a tentative solution(s). The references should be scholarly sources to support the ideas that are presented. It should present an introduction to the problem (a thesis statement), a hypothesis, research questions, an annotated bibliography, and a consideration of ethical issues as they relate to an Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Exit mobile version