When does evidence of eyewitness confidence inflation affect judgments in a criminal trial?.

Two studies investigated perceptions of eyewitness confidence inflation: increases in a witness's confidence between the time of the identification and the trial. Experiment 1 (N = 90) demonstrated that, for White participants, assessments of the strength of the defense case, the eyewitness's view, and participants' confidence in the eyewitness's accuracy were more favorable to the defense when there was evidence that the eyewitness's confidence increased over time (mere inflation condition), compared with a control condition. In addition, assessments of the defendant's guilt and the eyewitness's accuracy were more favorable to the defense when the eyewitness was aggressively challenged about the change in her confidence report (inflation + challenge). Experiment 2 (N = 360) demonstrated that, for Hispanic participants, sensitivity to confidence inflation did not interact with manipulations of the eyewitness's or defendant's race (White vs. Hispanic). In addition, the confidence inflation effect did not replicate with the Hispanic participants. Results are interpreted in terms of the ingroup bias in legal judgments and directions for future research.

Validity of the mockwitness paradigm: testing the assumptions.

Mockwitness identifications are used to provide a quantitative measure of lineup fairness. Some theoretical and practical assumptions of this paradigm have not been studied in terms of mockwitnesses' decision processes and procedural variation (e.g., instructions, lineup presentation method), and the current experiment was conducted to empirically evaluate these assumptions. Four hundred and eighty mockwitnesses were given physical information about a culprit, received 1 of 4 variations of lineup instructions, and were asked to identify the culprit from either a fair or unfair sequential lineup containing 1 of 2 targets. Lineup bias estimates varied as a result of lineup fairness and the target presented. Mockwitnesses generally reported that the target's physical description was their main source of identifying information. Our findings support the use of mockwitness identifications as a useful technique for sequential lineup evaluation, but only for mockwitnesses who selected only 1 lineup member. Recommendations for the use of this evaluation procedure are discussed.