Abstract
When questioning a reluctant witness, investigators sometimes encourage the witness by providing information about what other witnesses have said. Three experiments were conducted to test the combined effects of such co-witness information and suggestive questioning on the accuracy of eyewitness memory reports. Experiment 1 was analogous to the experience of a witness who receives information from an interviewer or questioner about what other witnesses have already said, whereas Experiments 2 and 3 simulated the situation in which a witness receives information directly from a co-witness. In all three experiments, when participants received incorrect information about a co-witness's response, they were significantly more likely to give that incorrect response than if they received no co-witness information. This effect persevered in a delayed memory test 48 h after the initial questioning session in Experiment 3. Accuracy rates were lowest of all when incorrect co-witness information was paired with questioning that suggested an incorrect response. These results have implications not only for the immediate effects on the accuracy of witnesses' memory reports, but also for the impact that even one such inaccurate report can have on the manner in which a case is investigated by the police or other authorities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193(5), 31–35.
Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9).
Backman, C. W. (1988). The self: A dialectical approach. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 229–260). New York: Academic Press.
Bekerian, D. A. (1993). In search of the typical eyewitness. American Psychologist, 48, 574–576.
Bekerian, D. A., & Bowers, J. M. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we mislead? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 139–145.
Belli, R. F. (1989). Influences of misleading postevent misinformation: Misinformation interference and acceptance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 72–85.
Betz, A. L., Skowronski, J. J., & Ostrom, T. M. (1996). Shared realities: Social influence and stimulus memory. Social Cognition, 14, 113–140.
Bothwell, R. K., Deffenbacher, K. A., & Brigham, J. C. (1987). Correlation of eyewitness accuracy and confidence: Optimality hypothesis revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 691–695.
Ceci, S. J., Ross, D. F., and Toglia, M. P. (1987). Suggestibility in children's memory: Psycholegal implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 38–49.
Couch, A., & Keniston, K. (1960). Yeasayers and naysayers: Agreeing response set as a personality variable. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 151–174.
Deffenbacher, K. A. (1980). Eyewitness accuracy and confidence: Can we infer anything about their relationship? Law and Human Behavior, 4, 243–260.
Deffenbacher, K. A. (1991). A maturing of research on the behaviour of eyewitnesses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 377–402.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Leippe, M. R. (1980). Effects of integrative memorial cognitive processes on the correspondence of eyewitness accuracy and confidence. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 261–274.
Lindsay, D. S. (1990). Misleading suggestions can impair eyewitnesses' ability to remember even details. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1077–1083.
Loftus, E. F. (1974). Reconstructing memory: The incredible witness. Psychology Today, 8, 116–119.
Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560–572.
Loftus, E. F. (1979). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Loftus, E. F., & Greene, E. (1980). Warning: Even memory for faces may be contagious. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 323–334.
Loftus, E. F., & Hoffman, H. G. (1989). Misinformation and memory: The creation of new memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 100–104.
Loftus, E. F., Miller, D. G., & Burns, H. J. (1978). Semantic integration of verbal information into a visual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 19–31.
Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. P. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 585–589.
Loftus, E. F., Schooler, J. W., & Wagenaar, W. A. (1985). The fate of memory: Comment on McCloskey and Zaragoza. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 375–380.
Loftus, E. F., & Zanni, G. (1975). Eyewitness testimony: The influence of the wording of a question. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 5, 86–88.
Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1994a). Eyewitness identification confidence. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony (pp. 348–361). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1994b). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 714–723.
McCloskey, M., & Zaragoza, M. (1985a). Misleading postevent information and memory for events: Arguments and evidence against memory impairment hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 1–16.
McCloskey, M., & Zaragoza, M. (1985b). Postevent information and memory: Reply to Loftus, Schooler, and Wagenaar. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 381–387.
Read, J. D., Lindsay, D. S., & Nicholls, T. (in press). The relationship between accuracy and confidence in eyewitness identification studies: Is the conclusion changing? In C. P. Thompson, D. Bruce, J. D. Read, D. Herrmann, D. Payne, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Processes and products of memory: Contributions from eyewitness and autobiographical memory, SARMAC Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Shaw, J. S., III, & McClure, K. A. (1996). Repeated postevent questioning can lead to elevated levels of eyewitness confidence. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 629–653.
Sherif, M. (1937). An experimental approach to the study of attitudes. Sociometry, 1, 90–98.
Sporer, S. L., Penrod, S., Read, D., & Cutler, B. (1995). Choosing, confidence, and accuracy: A meta-analysis of the confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 315–327.
Swann, W. B., Jr. (1983). Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self. In J. Suls & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 2, pp. 33–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tversky, B., & Tuchin, M. (1989). A reconciliation of the evidence on eyewitness testimony: Comments on McCloskey and Zaragoza. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 86–91.
Wall, P. M. (1965). Eyewitness identification in criminal cases. Springfield, IL: Thomas
Wells, G. L., & Murray, D. M. (1983). What can psychology say about the Neil v. Biggers criteria for judging eyewitness accuracy? Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 347–362.
Wells, G. L., & Murray, D. M. (1984). Eyewitness confidence. In G. L. Wells & E. F. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives (pp. 155–170). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wells, G. L., Seelau, E. P., Rydell, S. M., & Luus, C. A. E. (1994). Recommendations for properly conducted lineup identification tasks. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 223–241). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Yuille, J. C. (1993). We must study forensic eyewitnesses to know about them. American Psychologist, 48, 572–573.
Yuille, J. C., & Wells, G. (1991). Concerns about the application of research findings: The issue of ecological validity. In J. L. Doris (Ed.), The suggestibility of children's recollections (pp. 118–128). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Zaragoza, M. S., McCloskey, M., & Jamis, M. (1987). Misleading postevent information and recall of the original event: Further evidence against the memory impairment hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 36–44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Shaw III, J.S., Garven, S. & Wood, J.M. Co-witness Information Can Have Immediate Effects on Eyewitness Memory Reports. Law Hum Behav 21, 503–523 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024875723399
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024875723399