Witness self‐efficacy: Development and validation of the construct

Abstract

The present study used a Self-Efficacy Theory (SET; Bandura, 1977Bandura, , 1986 framework to address the need for an outcome measure in witness preparation training. The construct of Witness Self-Efficacy, broadly defined as a witness's perceived ability to testify in court, was developed drawing largely on existing self-efficacy literature. The goal of the study was to establish initial psychometric properties for the Witness Self-Efficacy Scale (WSES).Participants acting either as mock witnesses or jurors took part in a two-phase study.First, 41 mock witnesses were asked to provide a written account of being falsely accused of an act. They were then briefly deposed about the account, and completed the WSES and construct validity questionnaires. Mock witnesses finally testified under cross-examination from a mock attorney about the accusations. In the second portion, a total of 290 mock jurors (six to eight per group) observed videotaped testimonies of participants from phase one. Mock jurors then provided predictive validity ratings of witness credibility, believability, innocence likelihood, efficacy, and agreement with testimony.Bi-variate correlation analyses showed that the WSES was significantly positively related with general self-efficacy, social self-efficacy, and general self-confidence. The WSES was significantly negatively related to introversion. The scale displayed non-significant relations with social desirability, depression, self-esteem, and innocence expectancy. Multivariate regression analyses showed that the scale failed to predict any of the primary mock juror ratings.Follow-up multivariate regression analyses showed that mock juror ratings of witness confidence iii and the WSES predicted dependent measures, although these independent variables were collinear. Finally, there was an interaction between self and observer ratings of the WSES as it predicted witness credibility.Results are discussed with regard to theoretical and applied implications. Contrary to SET, self-reported WSE appears to be largely correlated with confidence and fails to predict outcomes on its own. Concerning witness preparation, the WSES possesses solid construct validity and reliability, but requires further testing within a witness preparation training model to assess its practical utility. A self-efficacy based method of witness preparation is proposed as a manner of continued research using the WSES.

The Observed Witness Efficacy Scale: a measure of effective testimony skills

“…Observed witness efficacy was assessed using the OWES (see ). This measure, containing 18 items, each scored on a 5‐point (1 = “Not well”; 5 = “Very well”) scale, is an adaptation of the WSES (Cramer et al., ). Alterations were made to the WSES as follows: (a) instructions were modified for the OWES so that the participant is instructed to rate the witness on testimony delivery skills included in the WSES; and (b) item wording was changed to reflect rating of the witness (as opposed to self‐ratings).…”

“…() proposed the concept of witness self‐efficacy, broadly defined as a witness's perceived ability to testify in court. Cramer, Neal, DeCoster, and Brodsky () subsequently drew on self‐efficacy theory and literature (e.g., Bandura, , ; Sherer et al., ) to develop and validate the Witness Self‐Efficacy Scale (WSES), a measure of self‐perceptions of testimony effectiveness. Testimony delivery skills based on effective witness testimony (e.g., Boccaccini et al., , ; Brodsky, ; Cramer, Neal, et al., ) and verbal/nonverbal communication (e.g., O'Barr, ) literatures formed the basis for indicators of witness self‐efficacy.…”

“…The WSES contains two factors: poise and communication style. Poise is akin to emotional control whereas communication style predominantly reflects verbal and nonverbal skills on the witness stand (Cramer et al., ). Both subscales demonstrated high internal consistency values, as well as expected positive associations with general and social self‐efficacy.…”

“…The specific alterations from the WSES to the OWES are as follows. First, the instructions of the WSES request the potential witness to “rate the degree to which you feel you ” can master the list of 18 testimony skills (Cramer et al., , p. 800). OWES instructions are altered so that observers of testimony “rate the degree to which you feel the witness did do” the list of 18 skills.…”

Perceived Credibility of Character Witnesses: Implications for Trial Consultation

“…Although it is not yet understood whether credibility for character witnesses includes the same characteristics as other types of witnesses, trial consultants can provide information to witnesses regarding techniques they can use to increase their selfefficacy (Cramer, Neal, DeCoster, & Brodsky, 2010) and reduce their anxiety (Brodsky, 2013). Such methods may include, but not be limited to, familiarization to the courtroom, breathing exercises, imagery, and an overview of the cross-examination process (Boccaccini, 2002;Brodsky, 2013).…”