Differential effects of clonazepam on declarative memory formation and face recognition

Benzodiazepines are commonly used drugs to treat anxiety in crime witnesses. These increase GABA inhibitory effects, which impairs aversive memory encoding and consolidation. Eyewitness memory is essential in justice. However, memory is malleable leading to false memories that could cause a selection of an innocent in a lineup. Here, we studied whether a low dose of Clonazepam impairs memory encoding as well as consolidation of faces and narrative of the event. We performed two experiments using a double-blind and between subject design (N = 216). Day 1: subjects watched a crime video and received Clonazepam 0.25 mg (CLZ group) or placebo (PLC group) before (Exp. 1) or after the video (Exp. 2) to assess the effect on encoding and consolidation. One week later, the memory was assessed using a present and absent target lineup and asking for a free recall. Regarding encoding, we found that in the CLZ group memory was impaired in the free recall task, while no differences were found for recognition memory. Regarding consolidation, we did not observe memory measures that were affected by this dose of benzodiazepines. The results suggest that while some aspects of eyewitness memory could be modulated even with low doses of benzodiazepine, others could not be affected. More studies should be performed with higher doses of CLZ similar to those administered in real life. These results are relevant in the judicial field to assess the reliability of the eyewitness elections under the effects of this drug.

Sex differences in eyewitness memory: A scoping review

Researchers in cognitive and forensic psychology have long been interested in the impact of individual differences on eyewitness memory. The sex of the eyewitness is one such factor, with a body of research spanning over 50 years that has sought to determine if and how eyewitness memory differs between males and females. This research has significant implications across the criminal justice system, particularly in the context of gendered issues such as sexual assault. However, the findings have been inconsistent, and there is still a lack of consensus across the literature. A scoping review and analysis of the literature was performed to examine the available evidence regarding whether sex differences in eyewitness memory exist, what explanations have been proposed for any differences found, and how this research has been conducted. Through a strategic search of seven databases, 22 relevant articles were found and reviewed. Results demonstrated that despite the mixed nature of the methodologies and findings, the research suggests that neither males nor females have superior performance in the total amount of accurate information reported, but rather that females may have better memory for person-related details while males may perform better for details related to the surrounding environment. There was also consistent evidence for the own-gender bias. There was some consensus that differences in selective attention between males and females may underlie these sex differences in eyewitness memory. However, none of the studies directly tested this suggested attentional factor, and thus future research is needed to investigate this using a more systematic and empirical approach.

Dissociative Amnesia: Remembrances Under Cover

The existence or questionability of "repressed memories" can be discussed as being a matter of definition. It seems, however, far-fetched to consider all "lost" memories as caused by encoding problems, brain damage, forgetfulness, failure to disclose events, and so on. We argue that dissociative amnesia (DA) (or "psychogenic amnesia," or "functional amnesia," or, as we favor to call it, "mnestic block syndrome") is caused by psychic alterations, but ultimately they can be traced to changes in the physiology of the brain, as we are of the opinion that all memory processes-positive or negative-alter brain functions, sometimes more permanently, sometimes transiently. We have proven this idea using functional imaging techniques, in particular fluoro-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography. Having investigated dozens of patients with severe and long-lasting DA conditions, we believe it to be disrespectful to many (but not to all) of the affected patients to question their disease condition, which can be proven to be not caused by feigning, malingering, or direct brain damage.

Application of artificial intelligence to eyewitness identification

Artificial intelligence is already all around us, and its usage will only increase. Knowing its capabilities is critical. A facial recognition system (FRS) is a tool for law enforcement during suspect searches and when presenting photos to eyewitnesses for identification. However, there are no comparisons between eyewitness and FRS accuracy using video, so it is unknown whether FRS face matches are more accurate than eyewitness memory when identifying a perpetrator. Ours is the first application of artificial intelligence to an eyewitness experience, using a comparative psychology approach. As a first step to test system accuracy relative to eyewitness accuracy, participants and an open-source FRS (FaceNet) attempted perpetrator identification/match from lineup photos (target-present, target-absent) after exposure to real crime videos with varied clarity and perpetrator race. FRS used video probe images of each perpetrator to achieve similarity ratings for each corresponding lineup member. Using receiver operating characteristic analysis to measure discriminability, FRS performance was superior to eyewitness performance, regardless of video clarity or perpetrator race. Video clarity impacted participant performance, with the unclear videos yielding lower performance than the clear videos. Using confidence-accuracy characteristic analysis to measure reliability (i.e., the likelihood the identified suspect is the actual perpetrator), when the FRS identified faces with the highest similarity values, they were accurate. The results suggest FaceNet, or similarly performing systems, may supplement eyewitness memory for suspect searches and subsequent lineup construction and knowing the system's strengths and weaknesses is critical.

When is memory more reliable? Scientific findings, theories, and myths

The question of whether human memory is reliable generated extensive research. Memory is open to reconstruction and false retrieval of unpresented information or unexperienced events. These can create problems in judgments and decisions that rely on memory accuracy. In the case of eyewitness testimony, these problems can result in injustice. Then again, memory is also reliable enough. Information acquisition, processing, and retrieval capacity of our memory made it possible to survive the course of evolution. Our memory also makes it possible to continue our daily lives, most of the time without major problems. In the present review, we suggest that the right question to ask may not be whether memory is reliable, but rather to ask when and under what circumstances memory is more reliable. The review's educational aim is to identify the conditions under which memory is more versus less reliable, and its theoretical aim is to discuss memory reliability. We reviewed the literature on situational, emotional, social, and individual difference variables that affect memory reliability, identified the conditions under which memory is more versus less reliable, summarized these outcomes as easy-to-reach items, and discussed them in the light of major theories. Our discussion also touched upon the differentiation of societal myths about the reliability of memory from scientific findings, since believing in memory myths can also affect the reliability of memory. Awareness of the specific circumstances under which memory is more reliable can lead to the consideration of how much memory can be trusted under those specific circumstances.

The Jena Eyewitness Research Stimuli (JERS): A database of mock theft videos involving two perpetrators, presented in 2D and VR formats with corresponding 2D and 3D lineup images

Empirical investigations into eyewitness identification accuracy typically necessitate the creation of novel stimulus materials, which can be a challenging and time-consuming task. To facilitate this process and promote further research in this domain, we introduce the new Jena Eyewitness Research Stimuli (JERS). They comprise six video sequences depicting a mock theft committed by two different perpetrators, available in both two-dimensional (2D) and 360° format, combined with the corresponding lineup images presented in 2D or three-dimensional (3D) format. Images of one suspect and eight fillers are available for each lineup. We evaluated lineup fairness by using mock eyewitness paradigm and noted a Tredoux's E of 4.687 for Perpetrator 1 and 5.406 for Perpetrator 2. Moreover, no bias towards the perpetrators was observed in the lineups. We incorporated 360° videos and 3D lineup images to encourage the adoption of innovative data formats in experimental investigations of eyewitness accuracy. In particular, compatibility with Virtual Reality (VR) makes JERS a promising tool for advancing eyewitness research by enabling researchers to construct controlled environments that offer observers an immersive experience. JERS is freely accessible for the use of academic purposes via the Open Science Framework (OSF).

Memory accuracy, suggestibility and credibility in investigative interviews with native and non-native eyewitnesses

Legal practitioners sometimes obtain eyewitness testimonies from non-native language speakers, yet few studies examine the effects of language in investigative interviews. Here, we investigate how testifying in a non-native vs. native language affects memory accuracy, susceptibility to suggestions, and witnesses perceived credibility. After viewing a mock-crime film, participants in Study 1 (N = 121) testified through (1) free recall, (2) cued recall and (3) the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales adapted to the crime scenario used in the present study either in their native (Swedish) or a non-native (English) language. They also rated their confidence in their memories, self-perceived credibility and cognitive effort. Native and non-native witnesses did not differ in memory accuracy, susceptibility to suggestions, self-rated credibility or cognitive effort. Non-native (vs. native) speakers did however report lower confidence in their memories. In Study 2, another group of participants (N = 202) were presented with the testimonies from Study 1, and judged witnesses’ credibility. Non-native witnesses were judged as less credible than native speakers. Thus, while the lower confidence exhibited by non-native eyewitnesses did not correspond to their actual memory accuracy, it influenced observers’ judgments of their performance. The results provide important knowledge for legal practices when evaluating the reliability of testimonies from non-native vs. native speaking eyewitnesses.

Experimental and meta-analytic evidence that source variability of misinformation does not increase eyewitness suggestibility independently of repetition of misinformation

Considerable evidence has shown that repeating the same misinformation increases its influence (i.e., repetition effects). However, very little research has examined whether having multiple witnesses present misinformation relative to one witness (i.e., source variability) increases the influence of misinformation. In two experiments, we orthogonally manipulated repetition and source variability. Experiment 1 used written interview transcripts to deliver misinformation and showed that repetition increased eyewitness suggestibility, but source variability did not. In Experiment 2, we increased source saliency by delivering the misinformation to participants via videos instead of written interviews, such that each witness was visibly and audibly distinct. Despite this stronger manipulation, there was no effect of source variability in Experiment 2. In addition, we reported a meta-analysis (k = 19) for the repeated misinformation effect and a small-scale meta-analysis (k = 8) for the source variability effect. Results from these meta-analyses were consistent with the results of our individual experiments. Altogether, our results suggest that participants respond based on retrieval fluency rather than source-specifying information.

The effect of refresher training on fact description in medical incident report writing in the Japanese language

To maintain the effectiveness of the training (1st-Training Session: 1st-TS) to accurate describe facts in the medical incident reports (IRs) in Japanese, a refresher TS was designed and its effectiveness was examined. First, textual analysis showed that IRs' accuracy significantly decreased six months after the 1st-TS. Based on this result, the refresher TS was designed and conducted with 64 residents. To verify the refresher TS' effectiveness, IRs after the 1st-TS, six months later, and after the refresher TS were compared via text analysis. The results showed that the refresher TS restored the description rate of patient's background, safety check procedures, original work procedures, information on equipment used, reporter's actions, and post-incident response. The questionnaire was also administered and showed that the refresher TS contributed to residents' motivation to learn about IRs. In conclusion, the refresher TS contributed to sustaining the effect of the 1st-TS on accurately describing IRs.

Perceptual comparisons modulate memory biases induced by new visual inputs

It is well-established that stimulus-specific information in visual working memory (VWM) can be systematically biased by new perceptual inputs. These memory biases are commonly attributed to interference that arises when perceptual inputs are physically similar to VWM contents. However, recent work has suggested that explicitly comparing the similarity between VWM contents and new perceptual inputs modulates the size of memory biases above and beyond stimulus-driven effects. Here, we sought to directly investigate this modulation hypothesis by comparing the size of memory biases following explicit comparisons to those induced when new perceptual inputs are ignored (Experiment 1) or maintained in VWM alongside target information (Experiment 2). We found that VWM reports showed larger attraction biases following explicit perceptual comparisons than when new perceptual inputs were ignored or maintained in VWM. An analysis of participants' perceptual comparisons revealed that memory biases were amplified after perceptual inputs were endorsed as similar-but not dissimilar-to one's VWM representation. These patterns were found to persist even after accounting for variability in the physical similarity between the target and perceptual stimuli across trials, as well as the baseline memory precision between the distinct task demands. Together, these findings illustrate a causal role of perceptual comparisons in modulating naturally-occurring memory biases.

The effect of cross-examination style questions on adult eyewitness accuracy depends on question type and eyewitness confidence

In adversarial legal systems across the world, witnesses in criminal trials are subjected to cross-examination. The questions that cross-examiners pose to witnesses are often complex and confusing; they might include negatives, double negatives, leading questions, closed questions, either/or questions, or complex syntax and vocabulary. Few psycholegal studies have explored the impact of such questions on the accuracy of adult witnesses' reports. In two experiments, we adapted the standard investigative interview procedure to examine the effect of five types of cross-examination style questions on witness accuracy and confidence. Participants watched a mock crime video and answered simple-style questions about the event. Following a delay, participants answered both cross-examination style questions and simple questions about the event. Negative and Double negative questions sometimes impaired the accuracy of witnesses' responses during cross-examination, whereas Leading and Leading-with-feedback questions did not impair - but sometimes enhanced - the accuracy of witnesses' responses. Participants who were better at discriminating between correct and incorrect responses on the initial memory test were more likely to improve the accuracy of their reports during cross-examination. Our findings suggest that the effect of cross-examination style questions on eyewitness accuracy depends on question type and witnesses' confidence in their responses.

Interviewing in virtual environments: Towards understanding the impact of rapport-building behaviours and retrieval context on eyewitness memory

Given the complexities of episodic memory and necessarily social nature of in-person face-to-face interviews, theoretical and evidence-based techniques for collecting episodic information from witnesses, victims, and survivors champion rapport-building. Rapport is believed to reduce some of the social demands of recalling an experienced event in an interview context, potentially increasing cognitive capacity for remembering. Cognitive and social benefits have also emerged in remote interview contexts with reduced anxiety and social pressure contributing to improved performance. Here, we investigated episodic memory in mock-eyewitness interviews conducted in virtual environments (VE) and in-person face-to-face (FtF), where rapport-building behaviours were either present or absent. Main effects revealed when rapport was present and where interviews were conducted in a VE participants recalled more correct event information, made fewer errors and were more accurate. Moreover, participants in the VE plus rapport-building present condition outperformed participants in all other conditions. Feedback indicated both rapport and environment were important for reducing the social demands of a recall interview, towards supporting effortful remembering. Our results add to the emerging literature on the utility of virtual environments as interview spaces and lend further support to the importance of prosocial behaviours in applied contexts.

The importance of the smallest effect size of interest in expert witness testimony on alcohol and memory

Memory experts are sometimes asked to evaluate the validity of accounts of witnesses, victims, or suspects. In some of these cases, they are asked what effect alcohol has on the validity of such accounts. In this article, we offer a guide on what expert witnesses can reliably say about how alcohol affects memory. We do so by resorting to effect sizes from previous studies and meta-analytic work, and address this novel question: Are these effect sizes meaningful in legal cases? More specifically, we argue that any determination of whether individual studies about alcohol and memory are practically relevant for legal cases, scientists must focus on the smallest effect size of interest. We make the case that a decrease or increase of only 1 detail, especially an incorrect detail, should be regarded as the smallest effect size of interest in this line of research. In line with this idea, we show that effect sizes in the alcohol and memory literature are often larger than this smallest effect size of interest. This finding is important because it implies that alcohol often exerts a practically relevant and meaningful detrimental effect on the reporting of both correct and incorrect details, which in turn negatively affects the validity of witness testimony.

Reexamining the sources of variance in recognition confidence: A reply to Kantner and Dobbins (2019)

Recently, Kantner and Dobbins (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(4), 1317-1324, 2019) reported a reanalysis of a series of previously published data sets in which they examined the sources of variation in recognition memory confidence ratings. Although between-subject differences in mean levels of confidence tended to account for the majority of variance in confidence ratings for both "old" and "new" decisions, the contribution of overall subject-level variation to confidence ratings for "new" decisions was noticeably and consistently larger. Here, I report a series of quantitative simulations along with a reanalysis of the original data to demonstrate that the relatively greater subject-level variation in mean confidence seen for "new" as compared with "old" recognition decisions largely reflects statistical constraints imposed by (a) the range limits of the ordinal scale used to measure confidence, and (b) the stronger relation between memory accuracy and confidence in "old" decisions. Therefore, any observed difference in the extent of subject-level variation in mean confidence between "old" and "new" recognition decisions need not imply a meaningful psychological distinction. These findings point out what in my view is an important statistical constraint that should be considered by researchers interested in understanding the bases of variation in memory confidence.

Enhancing the effectiveness of contact tracing interviews: A randomized controlled experiment of an enhanced cognitive interview protocol

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of a psychologically-based contact tracing interview protocol to a control protocol that emulated current practices under both interviewer-led and self-led modalities.

METHODS

This randomized controlled experiment utilized a 2 × 2 factorial design (Enhanced Cognitive protocol vs Control protocol; Interviewer-led call vs Self-led online survey). Data were collected online (n = 200; M_age = 44; 56.5% female; 79.5% White) during the COVID-19 pandemic (July 2, 2020 - September 15, 2020).

RESULTS

The Enhanced Cognitive protocol increased reported close contacts by 51% compared with the Control protocol (d = 0.44 [0.15, 0.71]). This effect was present for both interview modalities and for both identifiable and non-identifiable contacts. The Enhanced Cognitive protocol also increased both the quantity of person descriptors (d = 1.36 [0.87, 1.85]) and the utility of descriptions (r = 0.35 [0.13, 0.53]).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of cognitive principles in contact tracing interviews can significantly enhance the quantity and quality of information provided by respondents. Epidemiologists and public health investigators could benefit from utilizing cognitive principles and self-led modalities in contact tracing interviews.

Impact on the legal system of the generalizability crisis in psychology

Overgeneralizations by psychologists of the research evidence on memory and eyewitness testimony, such as "memory decays with time" or "memories are fluid and malleable," are beginning to appear in legal judgements and guidance documents, accompanied by unwarranted disparagement of lay beliefs about memory. These overgeneralizations could have significant adverse consequences for the conduct of civil and criminal law.

An own-race bias in the categorisation and recall of associative information

ABSTRACTPeople tend to better remember same-race faces relative to other-race faces (an "own-race" bias). We examined whether the own-race bias extends to associative memory, particularly in the identification and recall of information paired with faces. In Experiment 1, we presented white participants with own- and other-race faces which either appeared alone or accompanied by a label indicating whether the face was a "criminal" or a "victim". Results revealed an own-race facial recognition advantage regardless of the presence of associative information. In Experiment 2, we again paired same- and other-race faces with either "criminal" or "victim" labels, but rather than a recognition test, participants were asked to identify whether each face had been presented as a criminal or a victim. White criminals were better categorised than Black criminals, but race did not influence the categorisation of victims. In Experiment 3, white participants were presented with same- and other-race faces and asked to remember where the person was from, their occupation, and a crime they committed. Results revealed a recall advantage for the associative information paired with same-race faces. Collectively, these findings suggest that the own-race bias extends to the categorisation and recall of information in associative memory.

Eyewitness Identification Is a Visual Search Task

The simultaneous six-pack photo lineup is a standard eyewitness identification procedure, consisting of one police suspect plus five physically similar fillers. The photo lineup is either a target-present array (the suspect is guilty) or a target-absent array (the suspect is innocent). The eyewitness is asked to search the six photos in the array with respect to a target template stored in memory (namely, the memory of the perpetrator's face). If the witness determines that the perpetrator is in fact in the lineup (detection), then the next step is to specify the position of the perpetrator's face in the lineup (localization). The witness may also determine that the perpetrator is not present and reject the lineup. In other words, a police lineup is a detection-plus-localization visual search task. Signal detection concepts that have long guided thinking about visual search have recently had a significant impact on our understanding of police lineups. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Vision Science, Volume 7 is September 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

The Fallacy of an Airtight Alibi: Understanding Human Memory for "Where" Using Experience Sampling

A primary challenge for alibi-generation research is establishing the ground truth of real-world events of interest. In the current study, we used a smartphone app to record data on adult participants (N = 51) for a month prior to a memory test. The app captured accelerometry data, GPS locations, and audio environments every 10 min. After a week-long retention interval, we asked participants to identify where they were at a given time from among four alternatives. Participants were incorrect 36% of the time. Furthermore, our forced-choice procedure allowed us to conduct a conditional logit analysis to assess the different aspects of the events that the participants experienced and their relative importance to the decision process. We found strong evidence that participants confuse days across weeks. In addition, people often confused weeks in general and also hours across days. Similarity of location induced more errors than similarity of audio environments or movement types.

Statistical learning as a reference point for memory distortions: Swap and shift errors

Humans use regularities in the environment to facilitate learning, often without awareness or intent. How might such regularities distort long-term memory? Here, participants studied and reported the colors of objects in a long-term memory paradigm, uninformed that certain colors were sampled more frequently overall. When participants misreported an object's color, these errors were often centered around the average studied color (i.e., "Rich" color), demonstrating swap errors in long-term memory due to imposed statistical regularities. We observed such swap errors regardless of memory load, explicit knowledge, or the distance in color space between the correct color of the tested object and the Rich color. An explicit guessing strategy where participants intentionally made swap errors when uncertain could not fully account for our results. We discuss other potential sources of observed swap errors such as false memory and implicit biased guessing. Although less robust than swap errors, evidence was also observed for subtle shift errors towards or away from the Rich color dependent on the color distance between the correct color and the Rich color. Together, these findings of swap and shift errors provide converging evidence for memory distortion mechanisms induced by a reference point, bridging a gap in the literature between how attention to regularities similarly influences visual working memory and visual long-term memory.

Norwegian judges' knowledge of factors affecting eyewitness testimony: a 12-year follow-up

Eyewitness evidence often plays a critical role in decisions made in the criminal justice system. To evaluate eyewitness testimony accurately, judges must be aware of factors that can contaminate this type of evidence. In 2008, a survey of judges in Norway revealed a lack of awareness of several factors that affect eyewitness testimony. In the current study, a survey was administered to Norwegian judges (N=98) to evaluate their knowledge of factors that affect eyewitness testimony. Results showed that judges' overall knowledge scores were similar to those reported in 2008, but substantial increases and decreases in knowledge were observed for specific factors. Additional analyses indicated that increased uncertainty regarding some eyewitness factors led to a decline in accuracy when compared to responses observed in 2008. The current study provides an updated assessment of judges' knowledge of eyewitness factors and highlights the need for more comprehensive training for judges regarding these factors.

Eyewitness memory in the news can affect the strategic regulation of memory reporting

The public is increasingly exposed to news about eyewitness memory errors. This study draws from the strategic memory regulation framework [Goldsmith, M., Koriat, A., & Weinberg-Eliezer, A. (2002). Strategic regulation of grain size memory reporting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(1), 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.131.1.73] to make predictions about how eyewitness memory reporting is affected by exposure to such reports. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 226) viewed a mock crime, were exposed to a fictitious news report about eyewitness memory accuracy (memory is accurate, memory is inaccurate, or a control condition), and then recalled the mock crime. Participants who read that eyewitness memory is inaccurate were less confident in their memory accuracy and reported less information about the mock crime compared to those in the other conditions. The specificity and accuracy of recall did not vary across conditions, however. In Experiment 2, participants (n = 2,491) watched a mock crime and were asked to identify the perpetrator from a simultaneous lineup. Participants who read that eyewitness memory is inaccurate evaluated their memory for the mock crime as relatively poorer but their lineup decisions did not differ compared to other participants. This suggests that news about eyewitness memory inaccuracy affects how people evaluate their memory capability, and differentially affects memory output depending on the memory task.

Convicting with confidence? Why we should not over-rely on eyewitness confidence

Eyewitness memory researchers have recently devoted considerable attention to eyewitness confidence. While there is strong consensus that courtroom confidence is problematic, we now recognise that an eyewitness's initial confidence in their first identification - in certain contexts - can be of value. A few psychological scientists, however, have confidently, but erroneously claimed that in real-world cases, eyewitness initial confidence is the most important indicator of eyewitness accuracy, trumping all other factors that might exist in a case. This claim accompanies an exaggeration of the role of eyewitnesses' "initial confidence" in the DNA exoneration cases. Still worse, overstated claims about the confidence-accuracy relationship, and eyewitness memory, have reached our top scientific journals, news articles, and criminal cases. To set the record straight, we review what we actually know and do not know about the "initial confidence" of eyewitnesses in the DNA exoneration cases. Further reasons for skepticism about the value of the confidence-accuracy relationship in real-world cases come from new analyses of a separate database, the National Registry of Exonerations. Finally, we review new research that reveals numerous conditions wherein eyewitnesses with high initial confidence end up being wrong.

The Truth Is Out There: Accuracy in Recall of Verifiable Real-World Events

How accurate is memory? Although people implicitly assume that their memories faithfully represent past events, the prevailing view in research is that memories are error prone and constructive. Yet little is known about the frequency of errors, particularly in memories for naturalistic experiences. Here, younger and older adults underwent complex real-world experiences that were nonetheless controlled and verifiable, freely recalling these experiences after days to years. As expected, memory quantity and the richness of episodic detail declined with increasing age and retention interval. Details that participants did recall, however, were highly accurate (93%–95%) across age and time. This level of accuracy far exceeded comparatively low estimations among memory scientists and other academics in a survey. These findings suggest that details freely recalled from one-time real-world experiences can retain high correspondence to the ground truth despite significant forgetting, with higher accuracy than expected given the emphasis on fallibility in the field of memory research.

Metacognitive Monitoring and Control of Eyewitness Memory Reports in Autism

Providing eyewitness testimony involves monitoring one's memory to provide a detailed and accurate account: reporting details likely to be accurate and withholding potentially inaccurate details. Autistic individuals reportedly experience difficulties in both retrieving episodic memories and monitoring their accuracy, which has important implications for eyewitness testimony. Thirty autistic and 33 IQ‐matched typically developing (TD) participants viewed a video of a mock bank robbery followed by three phases of questions (with judgments of confidence). In Phase 1, participants freely generated the granularity of their responses (i.e., fine‐ or coarse‐grained). In Phase 2, participants answered the same questions but provided both a fine‐ and a coarse‐grained answer. In Phase 3, participants were instructed to maximize accuracy over informativeness by selecting one of their Phase 2 answers as their final answer. They either received the questions socially (from the experimenter) or answered them online. There were no group differences in accuracy or metacognitive monitoring, with both autistic and TD witnesses demonstrating: (a) a strong preference for reporting fine‐grained details at the expense of accuracy; (b) improved though still suboptimal grain size reporting when instructed to maximize accuracy over informativeness; (c) effective accuracy monitoring; and (d) higher overall accuracy when questions were delivered socially. There was, however, a subtle difference in metacognitive control, with autistic witnesses performing more poorly than TD witnesses when questions were delivered socially, but not when they were delivered online. These findings contrast with evidence suggesting that autism is marked by impairments in episodic memory and metacognitive monitoring and control. Autism Res 2020, 13: 2017‐2029. © 2020 The Authors. Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Lay Summary

Autistic people have been reported to experience subtle difficulties in monitoring and regulating their information reporting, which has important implications for providing eyewitness testimony. We found that autistic witnesses' testimony comprised a similar level of detail and accuracy as non‐autistic witnesses' accounts. However, autistic people found it difficult to optimize their testimony when the questions were delivered socially—but not when they answered the questions online. © 2020 The Authors. Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Regaining Consensus on the Reliability of Memory

In the last 20 years, the consensus about memory being essentially reliable has been neglected in favor of an emphasis on the malleability and unreliability of memory and on the public’s supposed unawareness of this. Three claims in particular have underpinned this popular perspective: that the confidence people have in their memory is weakly related to its accuracy, that false memories of fictitious childhood events can be easily implanted, and that the public wrongly sees memory as being like a video camera. New research has clarified that all three claims rest on shaky foundations, suggesting there is no reason to abandon the old consensus about memory being malleable but essentially reliable.

Reasons to Doubt the Reliability of Eyewitness Memory: Commentary on Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher (2018)

Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher (this issue) take issue with the common trope that eyewitness memory is inherently unreliable. They draw on a large body of mock-crime research and a small number of field studies, which indicate that high-confidence eyewitness reports are usually accurate, at least when memory is uncontaminated and suitable interviewing procedures are used. We agree with the thrust of Wixted et al.'s argument and welcome their invitation to confront the mass underselling of eyewitnesses' potential reliability. Nevertheless, we argue that there is a comparable risk of overselling eyewitnesses' reliability. Wixted et al.'s reasoning implies that near-pristine conditions or uncontaminated memories are normative, but there are at least two good reasons to doubt this. First, psychological science does not yet offer a good understanding of how often and when eyewitness interviews might deviate from best practice in ways that compromise the accuracy of witnesses' reports. Second, witnesses may frequently be exposed to preinterview influences that could corrupt reports obtained in best-practice interviews.

Rethinking the Confident Eyewitness: A Reply to Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher

In the current issue, Wixted, Mickes, and Fisher make the claim that eyewitness memory is not inherently unreliable. They also describe specific conditions under which an eyewitness's confidence can be a reliable indicator of accuracy in the context of both recall and recognition. We argue, however, that calculating the probative value of eyewitness evidence is more complicated than the authors acknowledge. In this commentary, we raise several concerns about the collection and assessment of eyewitness confidence in the real world. We also discuss how frequently the conditions specified by Wixted et al. are met in real cases. The potential for memory contamination is commonplace and can likely be outside the control of investigators. Moreover, there is reason to doubt that legal decision makers are sensitive to the myriad ways that eyewitness memory can be influenced. Because of this, we think eyewitness-memory scientists would do well to further research the intricacies of eyewitness confidence in the real world.

Time to exonerate eyewitness memory

Understandably enough, most people are under the impression that eyewitness memory is unreliable. For example, research shows that memory is malleable, so much so that people can come to confidently remember traumatic events that never actually happened. In addition, eyewitness misidentifications made with high confidence in a court of law are known to have played a role in more than 70% of the 358 wrongful convictions that have been overturned based on DNA evidence since 1989. However, recent research demonstrates that eyewitness confidence is highly indicative of accuracy on an initial, uncontaminated, properly administered photo lineup. In other words, low confidence indicates that the test result (i.e., the ID) is inconclusive, whereas high confidence indicates that the test result is far more conclusive. Critically, for the DNA exonerees who were misidentified by an eyewitness in a court of law, in every case where their initial confidence can be determined, the eyewitness appropriately expressed low confidence. For any other kind of evidence (e.g., DNA, fingerprints), an inconclusive test result like that would have been the end of it. By contrast, in the case of eyewitness evidence, investigators repeatedly tested (and therefore unwittingly contaminated) memory until a seemingly conclusive high-confidence ID could be presented to the jury. Blaming eyewitness memory for the failure of the criminal justice system to accept the inconclusive nature of the initial (uncontaminated) eyewitness evidence seems misguided. In addition to exonerating the innocent defendants who were wrongfully convicted, the time has come to exonerate eyewitness memory too.

In the DNA Exoneration Cases, Eyewitness Memory Was Not the Problem: A Reply to Berkowitz and Frenda (2018) and Wade, Nash, and Lindsay (2018)

The available real-world evidence suggests that, on an initial test, eyewitness memory is often reliable. Ironically, even the DNA exoneration cases-which generally involved nonpristine testing conditions and which are usually construed as an indictment of eyewitness memory-show how reliable an initial test of eyewitness memory can be in the real world. We endorse the use of pristine testing procedures, but their absence does not automatically imply that eyewitness memory is unreliable.