This study tests the claim that alcohol intoxication narrows the focus of visual attention on to the more salient features of a visual scene. A group of alcohol intoxicated and sober participants had their eye movements recorded as they encoded a photographic image featuring a central event of either high or low salience. All participants then recalled the details of the image the following day when sober. We sought to determine whether the alcohol group would pay less attention to the peripheral features of the encoded scene than their sober counterparts, whether this effect of attentional narrowing was stronger for the high-salience event than for the low-salience event, and whether it would lead to a corresponding deficit in peripheral recall. Alcohol was found to narrow the focus of foveal attention to the central features of both images but did not facilitate recall from this region. It also reduced the overall amount of information accurately recalled from each scene. These findings demonstrate that the concept of alcohol myopia originally posited to explain the social consequences of intoxication (Steele& Josephs, 1990) may be extended to explain the relative neglect of peripheral information during the processing of visual scenes.

Alcohol is a contributing factor in many crimes, yet little is known of its effects on eyewitness memory and face identification. Some authors suggest that intoxication impairs attention and memory, particularly for peripheral scene information, but the data supporting this claim are limited. The present study therefore sought to determine whether (i) intoxicated participants spend less time fixating on peripheral regions of crime images than sober counterparts, (ii) whether less information is recognised from image regions receiving fewer gaze fixations and (iii) whether intoxicated participants are less able to identify the perpetrator of a crime than sober participants. Contrary to expectations, participants' ability to explore and subsequently recognise the contents of the stimulus scenes was unaffected by alcohol, suggesting that the relationship between intoxication, attention and eyewitness memory requires closer scrutiny.

In immediate recall tasks, visual recency is substantially enhanced when output interference is low (Cowan, Saults, Elliott, & Moreno, 2002; Craik, 1969) whereas auditory recency remains high even under conditions of high output interference. This auditory advantage has been interpreted in terms of auditory resistance to output interference (e.g., Neath & Surprenant, 2003). In this study the auditory-visual difference at low output interference re-emerged when ceiling effects were accounted for, but only with spoken output. With written responding the auditory advantage remained significantly larger with high than with low output interference. These new data suggest that both superior auditory encoding and modality-specific output interference contribute to the classic auditory-visual modality effect.

This study examines the impact of acute alcohol intoxication on visual scanning in cross-race face learning. The eye movements of a group of white British participants were recorded as they encoded a series of own-and different-race faces, under alcohol and placebo conditions. Intoxication reduced the rate and extent of visual scanning during face encoding, reorienting the focus of foveal attention away from the eyes and towards the nose. Differences in encoding eye movements also varied between own-and different-race face conditions as a function of alcohol. Fixations to both face types were less frequent and more lingering following intoxication, but in the placebo condition this was only the case for different-race faces. While reducing visual scanning, however, alcohol had no adverse effect on memory, only encoding restrictions associated with sober different-race face processing led to poorer recognition. These results support perceptual expertise accounts of own-race face processing, but suggest the adverse effects of alcohol on face learning published previously are not caused by foveal encoding restrictions. The implications of these findings for alcohol myopia theory are discussed.

Despite the intoxication of many eyewitnesses at crime scenes, only four published studies to date have investigated the effects of alcohol intoxication on eyewitness identification performance. While one found intoxication significantly increased false identification rates from target absent showups, three found no such effect using the more traditional lineup procedure. The present study sought to further explore the effects of alcohol intoxication on identification performance and examine whether accurate decisions from intoxicated witnesses could be postdicted by confidence and response times. One hundred and twenty participants engaged in a study examining the effects of intoxication (control, placebo, and mild intoxication) and target presence on identification performance. Participants viewed a simultaneous lineup one week after watching a mock crime video of a man attempting to steal cars. Ethanol intoxication (0.6 ml/kg) was found to make no significant difference to identification accuracy and such identifications from intoxicated individuals were made no less confidently or slowly than those from sober witnesses. These results are discussed with respect to the previous research examining intoxicated witness identification accuracy and the misconceptions the criminal justice system holds about the accuracy of such witnesses.