The believability of repressed memories.

Abstract

Two experiments investigated how mock jurors react to a case involving a repressed memory of child sexual assault. Subjects read a fictional civil trial (Experiment 1) or criminal trial (Experiment 2) summary involving the sexual assault of a 6-year-old female. The summary was presented in one of three conditions: (a) child condition: the alleged victim reported her memory of the assault in the same year that the assault occurred; (b) repressed condition: the alleged victim reported the assault 20 years later, after remembering it for the first time; or (c) no-repressed condition: the alleged victim reported the assault 20 years later, but the memory of the assault had been present for the 20 years. Although the testimony of the alleged victim was believed to some extent in all conditions, the alleged victim in the child condition was believed at the highest level, and this was associated with more decisions against the defendant. The results are discussed in terms of how delayed reporting of child sexual assault crimes is associated with lower believability of the alleged victim. * We would like to thank Christy Kennedy, Paula Brinegar, and Elizabeth Thomas for their assistance in collecting and scoring the data, as well as Michael Nietzel, Monica Kern, Ronald Roesch, and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

Child abuse in the eyes of the beholder: Lay perceptions of child sexual and physical abuse

“…This gender difference is consistent with previous literature showing that female mock jurors find sexual abuse victims more credible than male mock jurors and are more likely to convict (e.g., Golding, Sego, Sanchez, & Hasemann, 1995;McCauley & Parker, 2001). It is also consistent with some literature examining perceptions of physical abuse (Kean & Dukes, 1991).…”

Gender differences in attitudes toward psychopathic sexual offenders

“…In brief, research that has examined adult rape cases with a female victim and a male perpetrator indicates that men tend to blame victims more, identify and empathize with victims less, and attribute greater responsibility to victims (Deitz, Blackwell, Daley, & Bentley, 1982;Foley & Pigott, 2000;see Brekke & Borgida, 1988, for a review). A similar pattern of results is noted in the literature for child victims of sexual violence, in that female jurors, compared to male jurors, tend to make more pro-victim case decisions with respect to credibility, responsibility, or guilt judgments (Bottoms, 1993;Bottoms, Davis, & Epstein, 2004;Bottoms & Goodman, 1994;Crowley, O'Gallaghan, & Ball, 1994;Golding, Sanchez, & Sego, 1997Golding, Sego, Sanchez, & Hasemann, 1995;McCauley & Parker, 2001;Quas, Goodman, & Jones, 2003;Schmidt & Brigham, 1996; for a meta-analytic review, see Schutte & Hosch, 1997). Whether such a gender effect also would be observed in an SVP mock jury paradigm with a child victim has never been tested.…”

The Effects of Memory Recovery Techniques on Jurors’ Perceptions of Recovered Memories

“…Previous studies have found mixed results as to whether continuous memories are perceived as more credible than recovered memories (Golding, Sego, Sanchez, & Hasemann, 1995, no significant differences; Loftus, Weingardt, & Hoffman, 1993, recovered memories < continuous memories Experiments 1 & 2), but what is clear from an inspection of the means is that recovered memories are at least moderately supported (Golding et al, 1995;Golding, Sego, & Sanchez, 1996;Loftus et al, 1993). The current study found both types of memories to be similarly perceived, with moderate to moderately high levels of credibility, although the means were higher in the naive memory recovery technique condition.…”