Department of Psychology, Bates College, Lewiston, ME 04240, USA.
Law Hum Behav. 2013 Aug;37(4):290-301. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000034. Epub 2013 May 6.
Despite myriad possible differences in perspectives brought to an investigative interview by eyewitnesses and interviewers, little is known about how such differences might affect eyewitness memory reports or interviewer behavior. Two experiments tested the impact of such differences in a dynamic interaction paradigm in which participants served as eyewitnesses and interviewers. In Experiment 1 (N = 38 pairs), reporting goals for eyewitnesses and interviewers were manipulated in a factorial design, with participants instructed to provide or obtain either as much information as possible or only accurate information. Matching interviewer-interviewee instructions promoted accurate reporting, regardless of the actual content of the instructions. In Experiment 2 (N = 45 pairs), access to information about corroborating eyewitness identifications was manipulated in a factorial design. Corroborating information affected interviewers, but not eyewitnesses. When interviewers did not have access to corroborating information, they provided more negative feedback, and there was a trend toward interrupting more and asking more yes/no questions. These experiments indicate that differences in perspective can have effects on both the content of a witness's report and the behavior of an interviewer. The potential for differences in perspective should be considered in research on protocols intended to maximize eyewitness report accuracy.
尽管目击者和访谈者在调查访谈中可能会有无数种不同的观点，但对于这些差异如何影响目击者的记忆报告或访谈者的行为，我们知之甚少。两个实验在一个动态交互范式中测试了这些差异的影响，参与者作为目击者和访谈者参与了实验。在实验 1（N = 38 对）中，以析因设计操纵了目击者和访谈者的报告目标，参与者被指示提供或获取尽可能多的信息或仅准确的信息。无论指令的实际内容如何，匹配的访谈者-被访谈者指令都促进了准确的报告。在实验 2（N = 45 对）中，以析因设计操纵了关于佐证目击者识别的信息的获取。佐证信息影响了访谈者，但不影响目击者。当访谈者无法获得佐证信息时，他们会提供更多的负面反馈，并且有更多的趋势是打断更多的问题，并询问更多的是/否问题。这些实验表明，观点的差异会对证人报告的内容和访谈者的行为产生影响。在研究旨在最大限度提高目击者报告准确性的协议时，应该考虑观点差异的可能性。
