RUI: The Dynamic Interaction Between Investigator and Eyewitness: Effects on Memory Reports and Interviewer Behavior

Bates College, Lewiston ME

Investigators

Abstract

This award is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) Eyewitnesses are a crucial source of information for crime scene investigators. Accurate information facilitates crime solutions; inaccurate information leads to wasted investigator effort or, even worse, wrongful convictions. How investigators and eyewitnesses affect each other during this information-gathering process forms the foundation of this research. Three experimental phases were designed to address: (a) whether the interaction between an investigator and eyewitness can change the accuracy of witness reports, and (b) whether changing witness behavior can affect the questions asked by the investigator. In the Witness Phase experiments, participant-eyewitnesses will view an event and be questioned by trained investigators. Investigators will systematically vary the feedback provided to witnesses during the interview. Two variables will be measured: whether witnesses change the level of detail provided in their reports and the level of confidence accompanying their reports as a function of investigator feedback. In the Investigator Phase, experiments will focus on the behavior of participant-investigators as they interview witnesses who are trained to respond in certain ways. For example, some witnesses will produce reports that become increasingly more detailed over the course of the interview. For all experiments in this phase, two variables will be measured: whether (and how) investigators' questions change and whether assessments of witness accuracy change as a function of changing witness behavior. In the Dynamic Interview Phase, witness reporting and investigator questioning will be assessed in the context of real interactions. Consequently, research participants will serve as both eyewitnesses and investigators. Over the course of the interview, changes in witness accuracy, witness confidence and investigator questions will again be measured. The manipulations tested in these three experimental phases are approximations of what eyewitnesses and investigators might experience in real crime situations. Therefore, if these experiments measure changes in report detail or accuracy, witness confidence, or investigator questioning strategies, there is a good possibility that similar changes may occur in real interview situations. The goal of these experiments is to produce recommendations for interviews that may enhance the amount of accurate information retrieved, thereby facilitating solutions to crimes and decreasing the likelihood of wrongful convictions.