TY - JOUR
T1 - Eyewitness identification
T2 - What can a psychologist tell a jury?
AU - McCloskey, Michael
AU - Egeth, Howard E.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1983/5
Y1 - 1983/5
N2 - Examines the arguments in favor of experimental psychologists testifying as expert witnesses in cases involving eyewitnesses to inform the jury about problems with eyewitness testimony. Rationales for such use are (1) the assertion the jurors cannot discriminate between accurate and inaccurate witnesses, and (2) the assumption that jurors are too willing to believe eyewitness testimony. The present authors point out that known cases of erroneous conviction due to juror overbelief fail to establish that the frequency is unacceptably high. Other studies indicate that jurors are able to take into account at least some factors that influence witness testimony. Contrary to claims made recently by psychologists and lawyers, it is by no means clear that expert psychological testimony about eyewitnesses would improve jurors' ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony. In fact, it is even possible that this sort of expert testimony would have detrimental effects. A hypothetical example of a prosecutor examining a defense psychologist is presented. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
AB - Examines the arguments in favor of experimental psychologists testifying as expert witnesses in cases involving eyewitnesses to inform the jury about problems with eyewitness testimony. Rationales for such use are (1) the assertion the jurors cannot discriminate between accurate and inaccurate witnesses, and (2) the assumption that jurors are too willing to believe eyewitness testimony. The present authors point out that known cases of erroneous conviction due to juror overbelief fail to establish that the frequency is unacceptably high. Other studies indicate that jurors are able to take into account at least some factors that influence witness testimony. Contrary to claims made recently by psychologists and lawyers, it is by no means clear that expert psychological testimony about eyewitnesses would improve jurors' ability to evaluate eyewitness testimony. In fact, it is even possible that this sort of expert testimony would have detrimental effects. A hypothetical example of a prosecutor examining a defense psychologist is presented. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
KW - role of experimental psychologists as expert witnesses in court cases involving eyewitness identification
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0001689976&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0001689976&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/0003-066X.38.5.550
DO - 10.1037/0003-066X.38.5.550
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0001689976
SN - 0003-066X
VL - 38
SP - 550
EP - 563
JO - American Psychologist
JF - American Psychologist
IS - 5
ER -