In eyewitness memory research, a distinction is made between estimator 
variables and system variables.

Estimator variables are characteristics of the witness or the witnessed event 
that influence the quality of information retrieved (age and sensory acuity of 
the witness, viewing conditions such as lighting, noise, duration of the 
witnessed event, presence of a weapon, etc.). We can't control these but can 
use information about these conditions to evaluate the probable reliability of 
reports (how well can a witness identify color of eyes or clothing under 
conditions of very low light).

System variables are characteristics of the investigation that influence the 
quality of information produced. These are procedures that we have some control 
over (do we use a sequential or a serial lineup identification procedure?, is 
the officer in charge blind to which individual is suspected as the 
perpetrator, does the witness get feedback after an identification, how are 
questions worded, does the witness have access to discussions with other 
witnesses or media coverage before giving his/her report or doing an 
identification, etc.). The ways in which these procedures can improve (e.g., 
the cognitive interview procedure) or detract from witness accuracy has 
generated an extensive research literature. In several instances, police 
investigative procedures have been changed to improve the quality of 
information obtained from witnesses. See Gary Well's web site for an extensive 
review of this work. Some evidence (such as hypnotically enhanced recollection) 
is no longer admissible as evidence in many states as a result of research that 
demonstrates how vulnerable to distortion witness memory is under the 
conditions of hypnotic suggestibility.

Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D.                      
Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
Associate Professor, Psychology                                        
University of West Florida
Pensacola, FL  32514 - 5751
 
Phone:   (850) 857-6355 or  473-7435
e-mail:        [email protected]
 
CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/
Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart McKelvie [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 8:15 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: RE: [tips] Eyewitness testimony

Dear Tipsters,

To play the Devil's Advocate slightly:

One person (a policeman or possibly prosecutor, I think) stated that eyewitness 
testimony evidence was still important and sometimes crucial to making a case 
against a suspect.

And we saw some changes in procedures to make line-up ID more valid.

My question is:

Ca we identify the conditions under eyewitness testimony should be regarded as 
suspect and those under which it should be regarded as trustworthy (valid)?

Sincerely,

Stuart 

___________________________________________________________________
 
Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D.,     Phone: (819)822-9600, Extension 2402
Department of Psychology,              Fax: (819)822-9661
Bishop's University,
2600 College Street,
Sherbrooke,
Québec J1M 1Z7,
Canada.
 
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page:
http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
___________________________________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: March 9, 2009 1:12 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: [tips] Eyewitness testimony

The USA television programme "60 Minutes" had an interesting presentation 
of the weakness of eyewitness testimony tonight, illustrated with a 
dramatic and instructive (true) case in which a woman falsely identified 
someone as her rapist. Elizabeth Loftus makes a brief appearance; the 
heavy lifting is left up to Gary  Wells.   As is so often the case 
nowadays, it took DNA to set things right. The piece ends with a most 
unlikely friendship. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/60minutes/main4848039.shtml
See the videos parts 1 and 2; and also a short featuring Loftus on Bugs 
Bunny's visit to Disneyland.

Stephen

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.          
Professor of Psychology, Emeritus   
Bishop's University      e-mail:  [email protected]
2600 College St.
Sherbrooke QC  J1M 1Z7
Canada

Subscribe to discussion list (TIPS) for the teaching of
psychology at http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/tips/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

Reply via email to