We compared the influence of a weapon's presence on eyewitnesses' memory for a White versus a Black male perpetrator. Prior data indicate that unusual objects in visual scenes attract attention and that a weapon's effect depends on how unusual it seems within the context in which it appears. Therefore, given the stereotype linking Black men and weapons, we predicted a weaker weapon focus effect with the Black perpetrator. The results of Experiment 1 supported this hypothesis using White and Black witnesses. Moreover, in Experiment 2 the weapon focus effect became nonsignificant when the Black perpetrator wore a style of clothing that is strongly associated with Black men. We propose that observing an armed Black perpetrator automatically activates a stereotype linking Black men with weapons and crime, which in turn reduces the perceived unusualness of the weapon and thus its ability to attract attention.

Although building rapport before an investigative interview is recommended-and sometimes empirically beneficial-to eyewitness memory, no research has experimentally examined the effects of maintaining rapport during a witness interview on adult eyewitness recall. As a result, the present study assessed the impact of rapport on eyewitness recall accuracy by comparing a pre-interview rapport only condition with a maintained rapport condition (where rapport was built before and maintained during the interview) and a no rapport control condition. Results revealed no benefits (or detriments) of building initial rapport-or any additional benefits of maintaining rapport-on witness recall quality, quantity, or 'don't know' responses. Our findings suggest that rapport or its maintenance may not directly affect eyewitness recall.However, as rapport is a humane eyewitness interviewing technique with some empirical support, we still advocate for its continued use.

The current study examined the potential for cognitive bias in lay examiners' comparisons of footwear impressions within the technical review process while addressing limitations of previous research. Prior research has found inconsistent results regarding the extent to which cognitive bias may influence forensic comparisons, often asking non‐experts to review forensic stimuli above their competency level. Furthermore, past research has largely ignored the potential for cognitive bias during the technical review process. In collaboration with the Miami‐Dade Police Department's Forensic Services Bureau, we examined the effects of previous examiners' level of experience and prior knowledge of the previous examiner's decision on the technical review stage of footwear impression stimuli. Before lay examiners were presented with pairs of known match and nonmatch footwear impressions, they were either told that an expert or a novice had previously examined them and determined them to be either a match, nonmatch, or inconclusive (plus a no‐information condition). Participants then evaluated each pair of footwear impressions to make their own determinations of match, nonmatch, or inconclusive. Results support the technical review process for all decision types, as known nonmatch stimuli were generally more difficult for lay examiners to assess than known match stimuli. Knowledge of a prior examiner's decision and status was observed only when the prior decision was inconclusive, suggesting the need for inclusion of inconclusive decisions in future research examining cognitive bias in forensic examination.