Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is Truth Stranger Than Fiction? Bizarre Details and Credibility Assessment

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A series of three studies were designed to examine the influence of bizarreness on perceived witness credibility by mock-jurors. Study 1 investigated the relationship between bizarre details (baseline, mild, moderate, extreme), crime perspectives (victim/witness), and fantasy proneness on credibility assessment of eyewitness statements. Study 2 examined bizarreness level according to the number of bizarre details present (5, 10, or 15) and Study 3 observed the relationship between bizarreness level and the type of detail (description, action, event). The results for all three studies indicated that credibility was negatively related to level of bizarreness. In addition, action and event details were less believable relative to perpetrator descriptions, especially when bizarreness increased. Concurrently, ratings of belief in events as reported, credibility, and plausibility decreased as the number of bizarre details increased. These findings suggest that certain events may be “too strange to be true”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akehurst L, Vrij A (1999) Creating suspects in police interviews. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29:192–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aleman A, Haan EHF (2004) Fantasy proneness, mental imagery and reality monitoring. Personality and Individual Differences 36:1747–1754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ask K, Landström S (2010) Why emotions matter: Expectancy violation and affective response mediate the emotional victim effect. Law and Human Behavior 34:392–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bell BE, Loftus EF (1988) Degree of detail of eyewitness testimony and mock juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 18:1171–1192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell BE, Loftus EF (1989) Trivial persuasion in the courtroom: The power of (a few) minor details. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56:669–679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bottoms BL, Goodman GS (1994) Perceptions of children’s credibility in sexual assault cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 24:702–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer N, Potter R, Fisher RP, Bond N, Luszcz MA (1999) Beliefs and data on the relationship between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology 13:297–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brillon Y, Louis-Guerin C, Lamarche MC (1984) Attitudes of the Canadian public toward crime policies. Ministry of the Solicitor General Canada, Ottawa, ON

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon JK, Newton DA (1991) Applying a social meaning model to relational messages of conversational involvement: Comparing participant and observer perspectives. Southern Communication Journal 56:96–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christianson SA, Hubinette B (1993) Hands up! A study of witnesses’ emotional reactions and memories associated with bank robberies. Applied Cognitive Psychology 7:365–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell K, Hiscock-Anisman C, Memon A, Rachel A, Colwell L (2007) Vividness and spontaneity of statement detail characteristics as predictors of witness credibility. American Journal of Forensic Psychology 25:4–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Conte JR (1994) Child sexual abuse: Awareness and backlash. Future of Children 4:226–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DePaulo BM, Lindsay JJ, Malone BE, Muhlenbruck L, Charlton K, Cooper H (2003) Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin 129:74–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dumas R, Testé B (2006) The influence of criminal facial stereotypes on juridic judgments. Swiss Journal of Psychology 65:237–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egeth SA (1993) What we do not know about eyewitness identification. American Psychologist 48:577–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein GO, McDaniel MA, Lackey S (1989) Bizarre imagery, interference, and distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology 15:137–146

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RP, Vrij A, Leins DA (2013) Does testimonial inconsistency indicate memory inaccuracy and deception? Beliefs, empirical research, and theory. In: Cooper BS, Griesel D, Ternes M (eds) Applied issues in investigative interviewing, eyewitness memory, and credibility assessment. Springer, New York, NY, pp 173–190

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman GS, Golding JM, Haith MM (1984) Juror’s reactions to child witnesses. Journal of Social Issues 40:139–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcomb MJ, Jacquin KM (2007) Juror perceptions of child eyewitness testimony in sexual abuse trail. Journal of Childhood Sexual Abuse 16:79–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough P, Rogers P (2007) Individuals who report being abducted by aliens: Investigating the differences in fantasy proneness, emotional intelligence and the big five personality factors. Imagination, Cognition and Personality 27:139–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalbfleisch PJ (1990) Listening for deception: The effects of medium on accuracy of detection. In: Bostrom RN (ed) Listening behavior: Measurement and application. New York, NY, Guilford

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann G, Drevland GB, Wessel E, Oversked G, Magnussen S (2003) The importance of being earnest: Displayed emotions and witness credibility. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17:21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macrae CN, Shepherd JW (1989) Do criminal stereotypes mediate juridic judgements? British Journal of Social Psychology 28:189–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey M, Egeth H (1983) Eyewitness identification: What can a psychologist tell a jury? American Psychologist 38:550–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel MA, Dornburg CC, Guynn MJ (2005) Disentangling encoding versus retrieval explanations of the bizarreness effect: Implications for distinctiveness. Memory and Cognition 33:270–279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merckelbach H (2004) Telling a good story: Fantasy proneness and the quality of fabricated memories. Personality and Individual Differences 27:1371–1382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merckelbach H, Horselenberg R, Muris P (2001) The creative experiences questionnaire (CEQ): A brief self-report measure of fantasy proneness. Personality and Individual Differences 31:987–995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington N, Hastie R (1988) Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory-structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology 14:521–533

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickel KL, Karam TJ, Warner TC (2009) Jurors’ responses to unusual inadmissible evidence. Criminal Justice and Behaviour 36:466–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peace KA, Brower KL, Shudra RD (2012) Fact or fiction?: Discriminating true and false allegations of victimization. In: Hutcherson AN (ed) Psychology of victimization. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, NY, pp 1–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Peace, K. A., & Ensslen, K. (2010, May). The stranger in the alley stole my purse!: The influence of schemas and repeated recall on memory. Poster presented at the Banff Annual Seminar in Cognitive Science (BASICS) Conference. Banff, AB, Canada.

  • Potter R, Brewer N (1999) Perceptions of witness behaviour-accuracy relationships held by police, lawyers, and mock-jurors. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 6:97–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pozzulo JD, Dempsey JL (2009) Witness factors and their influence on jurors’ perceptions and verdicts. Criminal Justice and Behaviour 36:923–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts JV (1992) Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. Crime and Justice 16:99–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyes RM, Thompson WC, Bower GH (1980) Judgmental biases resulting from differing availabilities of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39:2–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saladin M, Saper Z, Breen L (1988) Perceived attractiveness and attributions of criminality: What is beautiful is not criminal. Canadian Journal of Criminology 30:251–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Shedler J, Manis M (1986) Can the availability heuristic explain the vividness effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:26–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steller M, Köhnken G (1989) Criteria based content analysis. In: Raskin DC (ed) Psychological method in criminal investigation and evidence. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp 217–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Strömwall LA, Granhag PA (2003) Affecting the perception of verbal cues to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17:35–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singler JN, Couch JV (2002) Eyewitness testimony and the jury verdict. North American Journal of Psychology 4:143–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij A (2008) Detecting lies and deceit: Pitfalls and opportunities. Wiley, San Francisco, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrij A, Edward K, Bull R (2001) Stereotypical verbal and nonverbal responses while deceiving others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27:899–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler DA (1945) Standardized memory scale for clinical use. Journal of Psychology 19:87–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SC, Barber TX (1983) Fantasy-prone personality: Implications for understanding imagery, hypnosis, and parapsychological phenomena. In: Sheikh AA (ed) Imagery: Current theory, research, and application. Wiley, New York, NY, pp 340–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarmey AD (1993) Stereotypes and recognition memory for faces and voices of good guys and bad guys. Applied Cognitive Psychology 7:419–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaparniuk J, Yuille JC, Taylor S (1995) Assessing the credibility of true and false statements. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 18:343–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Grant MacEwan University, City Centre Campus, Rm 6-329H, 10700 – 104 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, Canada, T5J 4S2

    Kristine A. Peace, Krista L. Brower & Alexandra Rocchio

Authors
  1. Kristine A. Peace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krista L. Brower
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexandra Rocchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristine A. Peace.

Appendix A: Eyewitness Statement Stimuli

Appendix A: Eyewitness Statement Stimuli

I witnessed a mugging last night in Edmonton so I went to the police station to give a statement about what I saw. The culprit stole a woman’s purse which she said had about $50.00 in cash, her ID, and credit cards. I told the police that the perpetrator was a male who was around 5 feet 11 inches tall. He looked to be between the ages of 30 and 40, and was quite thin and lanky. His hair appeared to be dark brown, about medium length, and curly. He also had green eyes and a snake tattoo on his arm. Everything about him looked strange. He was wearing a black T-shirt, pants, and was waving a black glove around in the air. He also had a bag of some sort tied around his waist.

The woman was walking home from work and passed by this alley, and the man jumped out from it and startled her. He pushed her to the ground and said “Give me your money”. Then he started twitching and muttering some other words to himself repeatedly. I was confused and it all happened so fast! He grabbed her purse, got up, and took off running down the street. The woman tried to get up and follow him but had hurt herself when she fell. Since I had seen what happened, I helped her up and agreed to go to the police station with her. She was so shaken that we stopped at a store on the way so I could buy her some water. The woman said it was the scariest and strangest experience of her life. I’m glad I’m OK, but I hope they catch the guy soon. He creeped me out! I can still hardly believe it happened it was so weird.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peace, K.A., Brower, K.L. & Rocchio, A. Is Truth Stranger Than Fiction? Bizarre Details and Credibility Assessment. J Police Crim Psych 30, 38–49 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-014-9140-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-014-9140-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation