Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego.
Department of Psychology, Iowa State University.
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2021 Dec;22(1_suppl):1S-18S. doi: 10.1177/15291006211026259.
Eyewitness misidentifications are almost always made with high confidence in the courtroom. The courtroom is where eyewitnesses make their identification of defendants suspected of (and charged with) committing a crime. But what did those same eyewitnesses do on the identification test, conducted early in a police investigation? Despite testifying with high confidence in court, many eyewitnesses also testified that they had initially identified the suspect with low confidence or failed to identify the suspect at all. Presenting a lineup leaves the eyewitness with a memory trace of the faces in the lineup, including that of the suspect. As a result, the memory signal generated by the face of that suspect will be stronger on a later test involving the same witness, even if the suspect is innocent. In that sense, testing memory contaminates memory. These considerations underscore the importance of a newly proposed recommendation for conducting eyewitness identifications: . This recommendation applies not only to additional tests conducted by police investigators but also to the final test conducted in the courtroom, in front of the judge and jury.
目击证人的错误指认在法庭上几乎总是伴随着高度的信心。法庭是目击证人对涉嫌(并被控)犯罪的被告进行指认的地方。但是,在警方调查初期进行的识别测试中,这些相同的目击证人做了什么呢?尽管在法庭上作证时充满信心,但许多目击证人也作证说,他们最初对嫌疑人的识别信心较低,或者根本无法识别嫌疑人。呈现照片组会在目击证人的记忆中留下照片组中面孔的痕迹,包括嫌疑人的面孔。因此,即使嫌疑人是无辜的,在稍后涉及同一证人的测试中,该嫌疑人的面部产生的记忆信号也会更强。从这个意义上说,测试记忆会污染记忆。这些考虑因素突显了新提出的进行目击证人识别的建议的重要性:. 该建议不仅适用于警方调查员进行的额外测试,也适用于在法官和陪审团面前进行的法庭上的最终测试。