Abstract
Individual eyewitness recall reports were gathered from witnesses who were later put into groups to discuss and reach a consensus on a description of a simulated crime they had witnessed. Groups gave more complete reports but at the price of a significant increase in errors of commission (the fabrication of details under group pressure).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References Note
Rupp, A., Warmbrand, A., Karash, A., & Buckhout, R. Effects of group interaction on evewitness reports. Paper presented at the meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association. New York. 1976.
References
Asch, S. Studies of Independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 1956, 70(9).
Ballot, P. (Ed.), Warren commission report. Island Park, N. Y: Scanartronics Corporation, 1964.
Buckhout, R. The psychology of eyewitness testimony. Law and Psychology Review, 1975, 1, in press.
Hall, E. J., Mouton, J. S., & Blake, R. R. Group problem solving effectiveness under conditions of pooling vs. interaction. Journal of Social Psychology, 1963, 59, 147–157.
Hogan, H. W. Time perception and stimulus preference as a function of stimulus complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 32–35.
Levine, R. J., & Tapp, J. L. The psychology of criminal identification: The gap from Wade to Kirby. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1973, 212, 1079.
Marshall, J. Law and psychology in conflict. New York: Anchor, 1966.
Moscovici, S., & Neve, P. Studies on polarization of judgements: III. Majorities, minorities and social judgements. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1973, 3, 479–484.
Muensterberg, H. On the witness stand, New York: Doubleday Page & Co., 1908.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Alper, A., Buckhout, R., Chern, S. et al. Eyewitness identification: Accuracy of individual vs. composite recollections of a crime. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 8, 147–149 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335108
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335108