If anything else comes to mind… better keep it to yourself? Delayed recall is discrediting—unjustifiably.

Abstract

Inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts are perceived as indicative of inaccuracy and reduce the witnesses' credibility. Reminiscence, the delayed recall of previously not recalled information, is generally interpreted as a type of inconsistency. Even though it does not necessarily involve the falsity of the statements, reminiscence presents a counterintuitive instance with mostly unknown reliability. Two studies empirically assessed the accuracy of reminiscent items after retention intervals of up to 1 week and contrasted them with peoples' beliefs regarding their accuracy. In line with an implicit assumption of memory fading with the passage of time, delayed recall of previously unmentioned details was judged to be unreliable. In contrast, actual accuracy of reminiscent details was consistently high and even comparable to immediate recollections. Although participants generally underestimated accuracy, it was most pronounced in the case of reminiscence. The findings are discussed within the context of contemporary legal practice, such as jury instructions.

That’s not what you said the first time: A theoretical account of the relationship between consistency and accuracy of recall

“…Our research, as well as that of others (Gilbert & Fisher, 2006; Krix et al, 2015; Oeberst, 2012, 2015), does suggest that inconsistencies are common among people with no incentive to lie; as such, small or few inconsistencies should not be considered an indication of dishonesty or general inaccuracy. However, because we have not measured inconsistencies within subjects with a motivation to lie it remains possible that higher levels of inconsistency may, in fact, be indicative of lying.…”

“…This is particularly true of reminisced memories, which lawyers are trained to use to discredit the witness in a process known in the legal community as “impeachment by omission” (McElhaney, 1987). This effect finds some support in the memory literature as well: Untrained observers expect reminisced memories to be much lower in accuracy than consistently produced information, and even to be lower in accuracy than they actually are (Oeberst, 2012). Trained detectives exhibit the same bias (Krix, Sauerland, Lorei, & Rispens, 2015).…”

“…Only one experiment that we know of in the literature (Oeberst, 2012; Experiment 1) used a list-based procedure and examined the relationship between accuracy and consistency of recall. In that experiment, reminisced items were not found to be less accurate than consistently recalled items, a result inconsistent with all of the results from eyewitness paradigms reviewed earlier.…”

Rapport Operationalized as a Humanitarian Interview in Investigative Interview Settings

“…One criterion Swedish courts may use to assess witness reliability is consistency in testimony (Will en & Str€ omwall, 2012). This includes reminiscence, the delayed recall of information not recalled previously, and other inconsistency in testimony; for example, discrepancies between information provided in court and in police interviews, or between police interviews, can be used by judicial actors to question witnesses' (Oeberst, 2012), crime victims' and suspects' credibility and reliability in court. Reminiscence has not been explored in the present study; however, our results may still be of general practical use for practitioners in clarifying the benefits of applying a humanitarian rapport interview even in cases including a long retention interval.…”

Memory Errors in Alibi Generation: How an Alibi Can Turn Against Us

“…Further research has replicated and extended these findings. For example, reminiscent details can be highly accurate (e.g., Krix, Sauerland, Lorei, & Rispens, ; Oeberst, ). Importantly, such research has also underlined the disconnect between people's expectations of and the reality of inconsistencies' correlation with accuracy.…”