Content vs. age: perceived credibility of older and young adult eyewitnesses with confidence inflation

Iida, Ryosuke; Itsukushima, Yukio

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2020.1818239

Cited by 3 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar findings by Iida and Itsukushima (2021;Experiment 1) suggest that consistencies may influence credibility perceptions and verdict decisions in a convenience store robbery where a kitchen knife was present. Consistent with Bruer and Pozzulo (2014), eyewitness age (i.e., victim;21-vs. 74-year-old), as well as the interaction between eyewitness age and consistency, did not influence these outcomes.…”

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 52%

“…For example, a consistent eyewitness would confirm they were 100% confident their prior statement was correct, compared to 50% confident their original statement was correct. They found the consistent eyewitness was perceived as more credible, leading to more guilty verdicts, compared to the eyewitness who was only 50% confident in their prior statement, suggesting that inconsistencies influenced juror decision-making outcomes (Iida & Itsukushima, 2021).…”

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The current study will focus on examining inconsistencies as a number. Much of the current literature examining the number of eyewitness inconsistencies has included a baseline or control condition where an eyewitness is entirely consistent (e.g., zero inconsistencies; Brewer & Burke, 2002;Brewer & Hupfeld, 2004;Bruer & Pozzulo, 2014;Iida & Itsukushima, 2021;Lindsay et al, 1986;Pica & Pozzulo, 2017). However, a fully consistent witness is not likely to happen in the real world (e.g., Brewer et al, 1999;Fisher & Cutler, 1995).…”

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating Mock Jurors’ Judgements on Eyewitness Age, Inconsistencies and Crime Type

Fraser

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crown: Are you aware your girlfriend was laid off and going through financial difficulties? Witness: That doesn't mean I would do this! Crown: No further questions Your Honour. The Defence calls their final witness, Mrs. Mackay to the stand. Defence: Hello Mrs. Mackay. Can you state your name and why you are here today? Witness: Hello. Yes, my name is Grace Mackay, and I am a co-owner of a custom window company. I am here today because I am the employer for Mr. Winters. Defence: How long has Mr. Winters been working for you? Witness: Oh about 5 years now. He is a very good employee with no customer complaints. Defence: Do you believe there is any reasonable explanation as to why Mr. Winters would rob Mr. Anderson? Witness: No. There is just no way he could hurt someone! Defence: Thank you. No further questions Your Honour.

show abstract

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Perceptions Of Eyewitness Inconsistencies and Accuracy Simil...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating Mock Jurors’ Judgements on Eyewitness Age, Inconsistencies and Crime Type

Fraser

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beyond these opposing findings, there is still recent literature that suggests there is no influence of eyewitness age on jurors' credibility judgements (Collins et al, 2017, Iida & Itsukushima, 2021Pica et al, 2019b;Thompson et al, 2019). Recently, Thompson and colleagues (2019) examined how mock-jurors' perceptions and verdict decisions would be influenced by eyewitnesses of varying adult ages (i.e., young adult (25 years-old vs middle-aged adult-50 years-old) vs. older adult (75 years-old).…”

Section: Eyewitness Age and Credibility Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The inconsistencies found across the research regarding eyewitness age credibility suggests that eyewitness age alone is not predictive of final verdict decisions (Ross et al, 1990;Schmidt & Brigham, 1996). Some argue that perceived credibility is not a function of eyewitness age at all, but rather the contents of their testimony (Iida & Itsukushima, 2021). Perceived credibility appears to be influenced by factors such as juror stereotypes, case circumstances, eyewitness relation to the crime (e.g., bystander versus victim), and type of crime (i.e., nonsexual versus sexual).…”

Section: Two-factor Model Of Child Eyewitness Credibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Canadians take the Stand: The Influence of Age and Race on Mock-Juror Perceptions and Verdict Decisions

Vettese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined if race and age interact to influence juror perceptions of eyewitness memory and defendant guilt. Eyewitness age (i.e., 12-vs. 18-years-old), eyewitness race (i.e., Indigenous vs. White), and defendant race (i.e., Indigenous vs. White) were manipulated using a mock-trial transcript. Participants (N= 275) were recruited from psychology courses and Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform. Contrary to the hypotheses, Indigenous eyewitness testimony resulted in more guilty verdicts, higher guilt ratings, less favourable perceptions of the defendant, and more favourable perceptions of the eyewitness. Mock-jurors were more punitive toward White defendants and held more favourable perceptions of Indigenous defendants. Racial bias scores moderated the relationships between eyewitness race, defendant race, and the interaction of eyewitness-defendant race for verdict decisions and perceptions of trial party members. This research contributes to the understanding of racial bias in juror decision-making research and can be used to inform jury selection and best practices in the Canadian legal system.Witness: I am one of his best friends; I have known Mr. Smith since grade school. Defence: Mr. Simmons, what do you think of the allegations against Mr. Smith today? Witness: I am shocked. I know Mr. Smith like nobody else does, and I know he wouldn't physically assault anyone. Elijah should be ashamed of trying to destroy his legacy. Defence: So, you think that there is no way Mr. Dakota Smith could have physically abused a student at the school he worked at for three decades? Witness: Definitely not. Defence: How can you be so sure? Witness: I have known Mr. Smith for a very long time. I would have known if this happened, he would have told me. It is a shame that this student is misremembering the past or trying to ruin a great teacher's reputation. Defence: Thank you Mr. Simmons. No further questions your Honour.

show abstract

Increasing disclosures of older adult maltreatment: a review of best practices for interviewing older adult eyewitnesses and victims

Wyman

Malloy

2023

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Content vs. age: perceived credibility of older and young adult eyewitnesses with confidence inflation

Cited by 3 publications

References 24 publications

Evaluating Mock Jurors’ Judgements on Eyewitness Age, Inconsistencies and Crime Type

Evaluating Mock Jurors’ Judgements on Eyewitness Age, Inconsistencies and Crime Type

Indigenous Canadians take the Stand: The Influence of Age and Race on Mock-Juror Perceptions and Verdict Decisions

Increasing disclosures of older adult maltreatment: a review of best practices for interviewing older adult eyewitnesses and victims

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About