Doctoral Dissertation Research: No Guts, No Glory: Eyewitness Credibility, Crime, and the US Courts

Claremont Graduate University, Claremont CA

Investigators

Abstract

PI and Co-PI: Kathy Pezdek and Kathryn Sperry Title: Doctoral Dissertation Research: No Guts, No Glory: Eyewitness Credibility, Crime, and the U.S. Courts 0752519 Project Abstract This research will examine whether jurors perceive eyewitnesses who testify against a gang member as acting against their self-interest, and does this perceived self-interest inflate jurors interpretations of eyewitness credibility? To answer this question, undergraduate students will be asked to read a trial transcript, in which the level of threat (i.e., self-interest) experienced by the eyewitness is manipulated. The dependant measures are the credibility of the eyewitness and the final verdict. Specifically, the research addresses whether the relationship between the risk in testifying and inflated credibility is mitigated if the risk is perceived to be short-term? This construct will be manipulated by addressing whether or not the witness is moving away from the gang territory after the trial. It is hypothesized that if the risk is perceived to be temporary, the credibility will not be inflated. Experiment 1 tests whether a witness who is perceived as testifying at a risk, thereby going against self-interest, will receive higher ratings of credibility. Further, does the inflated credibility lead to more guilty verdicts? In this experiment, "self interest" is manipulated by whether or not the eyewitness has been threatened for testifying in a gang case. Experiment 2 addresses a possible mediating variable on the above relationship. The proposed program of research addresses an extremely relevant issue in our legal system given the court's inconsistency regarding whether to admit gang evidence at trial. The theory of self-interest also could be used to understand how jurors' perceive highly paid expert witnesses, jailhouse snitches, and alibi witnesses. This understanding could help the courts guard against potential miscarriages of justice in our legal system.