Department of Psychology, City University London, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013 Dec;14(12):869-76. doi: 10.1038/nrn3627. Epub 2013 Oct 30.
Adults frequently provide compelling, detailed accounts of early childhood experiences in the courtroom. Judges and jurors are asked to decide guilt or innocence based solely on these decades-old memories using 'common sense' notions about memory. However, these notions are not in agreement with findings from neuroscientific and behavioural studies of memory development. Without expert guidance, judges and jurors may have difficulty in properly adjudicating the weight of memory evidence in cases involving adult recollections of childhood experiences.
成年人经常在法庭上提供令人信服的、详细的童年经历描述。法官和陪审员被要求仅凭这些几十年前的记忆，运用关于记忆的“常识”概念来判断有罪还是无罪。然而，这些概念与神经科学和记忆发展的行为研究的发现并不一致。如果没有专家的指导，法官和陪审员在涉及成年人对童年经历的回忆的案件中，可能难以正确判断记忆证据的分量。
