Thorley Craig
a Department of Psychology , James Cook University , Townsville , Australia.
Memory. 2018 Sep;26(8):1128-1139. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2018.1432058. Epub 2018 Jan 29.
Most crimes have multiple eyewitnesses. The police typically interview co-witnesses separately. In time-sensitive investigations, this could slow down evidence accumulation. Having co-witnesses collaboratively recall a crime could potentially expedite evidence accumulation. However, past research shows that collaborative group members often have conflicting retrieval strategies that disrupt each other, degrading overall recall. This cost could potentially be overcome by aligning group members' retrieval strategies with category clustering recall (CCR), which is a retrieval strategy where information is recalled from a series of forensically relevant categories (e.g., recalling the protagonists' appearance, then actions). This study examined the costs and benefits of collaborative eyewitness memory by having collaborative pairs of strangers, nominal pairs (i.e., two individuals whose recall is pooled) and lone individuals watch a crime and recall it using free recall or CCR. The collaborative pairs recalled the crime faster than the nominal pairs. They also recalled more correct information than individuals but less than nominal pairs, irrespective of the retrieval method. There is therefore a speed-recall completeness trade-off when collaborative groups recall crimes. Importantly, all participants recalled more correct information when using CCR. This provides initial evidence suggesting that CCR is superior to free recall. Further research examining CCR's benefits is recommended.
大多数犯罪都有多个目击者。警方通常会分别询问共同目击者。在时间紧迫的调查中,这可能会减缓证据的收集。让共同目击者共同回忆犯罪事件可能会加快证据的收集。然而,过去的研究表明,合作小组的成员往往有相互冲突的检索策略,这些策略会相互干扰,降低整体回忆效果。通过使小组成员的检索策略与类别聚类回忆(CCR)保持一致,这种代价有可能被克服,CCR是一种检索策略,即从一系列与法医相关的类别中回忆信息(例如,回忆主角的外貌,然后是行为)。本研究通过让陌生的合作对、名义对(即回忆被汇总的两个人)和单独的个体观看犯罪事件并使用自由回忆或CCR来回忆,检验了合作目击者记忆的成本和收益。合作对回忆犯罪事件的速度比名义对快。无论采用何种检索方法,他们回忆的正确信息也比个体多,但比名义对少。因此,当合作小组回忆犯罪事件时,存在速度与回忆完整性的权衡。重要的是,所有参与者在使用CCR时回忆出了更多正确信息。这提供了初步证据,表明CCR优于自由回忆。建议进一步研究CCR的益处。