How to Improve Eyewitness Testimony Research: Theoretical and Methodological Concerns About Experiments on the Impact of Emotions on Memory Performance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Psychological Research https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01488-4 REVIEW How to improve eyewitness testimony research: theoretical and methodological concerns about experiments on the impact of emotions on memory performance Kaja Głomb1 Received: 11 July 2020 / Accepted: 3 February 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to present crucial shortcomings of research into eyewitness testimony. It presents the state-of- the-art of research on the relationship between emotions and memory performance. In addition, it addresses contradictions and concerns about previous studies. Despite the declarations of consensus on the role of emotions in memory coding and retrieving, there are as many studies suggesting that emotional events are better remembered than neutral ones, as there are reports that show the opposite. Therefore, by indicating the theoretical and methodological limitations of previous studies, this paper advocates a more rigorous approach to the investigation of emotions and their impact on the quality and quantity of testimony. It also provides a framework for inquiry that allows better comparisons between studies and results, and may help to build a more comprehensive theory of the efects of emotion on memory Introduction testimony, which only superfcially seems to have been resolved. Eyewitnesses often make mistakes, misreport and misi- The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the short- dentify; thus, some of them are unreliable sources of infor- comings of laboratory research concerning the efect of mation. There is hardly a textbook on the psychology of emotions on memory performance, and to analyse the con- eyewitness testimony that suggests otherwise. After more sequences for comprehension and the application of empiri- than 40 years of research on memory relating to criminal cal fndings. Moreover, it will address them by suggesting a events, this notion is increasingly accepted outside the feld theoretical and methodological framework that may beneft of academic psychology and infuences legal proceedings research and serve as general guidelines for improving the and decisions. quality of studies. In consequence, it will be easier to draw However, with growing awareness of human memory solid, well-grounded conclusions about the role of emotions limitations and its consequences for eyewitness testimony in memory performance. comes a discussion about the status of knowledge based on It should be noted that this paper is not a systematic laboratory research. For many decades, almost every empiri- review of the issue. Readers interested in more general cal article in the feld discusses shortcomings of research. knowledge on the application of eyewitness testimony Yet, they rarely include practical guidelines on how to research may refer to other papers available in the literature improve research. As a consequence of questionable meth- (e.g. Chae, 2010; Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, & Memon, 2001; odological basis, there is no shortage of controversy over Wagstaf, MaCveigh, Boston, Scott, Brunas-Wagstaf, & conficting results. This seems particularly evident in the Cole, 2003). case of research on the infuence of emotions on eyewitness What do we know about emotions * Kaja Głomb and eyewitness testimony? [email protected]; [email protected] Eyewitness testimony is a legal term that refers to an account 1 Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Management and Social Communication, Jagiellonian University of a crime given by an individual who has seen or been in Kraków, ul. Łojasiewicza 4, 30-348 Kraków, Poland involved in that event. It often includes not only bystanders Vol.:(0123456789)1 3 Psychological Research but also victims. Eyewitness testimony can have diferent of eyewitness testimony as there is evidence to the contrary. forms, from a description of an event or a perpetrator, to Empirical fndings suggest that memory of stressful events the identifcation of suspects or important objects such as tends to be accurate, as evidenced by research in eyewit- weapons or vehicles. For many decades, research on eye- ness testimony (e.g. Block, Greenberg & Goodman, 2009; witness testimony has focused on the identifcation of indi- Christiansona & Hübinette, 1993; Christianson et al., 1991; vidual, situational, environmental, and system variables that Houston, Cliford, Phillips, & Memon, 2013; Maras, Gaigg impact the quality and quantity of testimony. Consequently, & Bowler, 2012; Smeets, Candel & Merckelbach, 2004), as we acknowledge now that eyewitness evidence may not be well as in the more general approach (e.g. Anderson, Wais as reliable as we used to think. & Gabrieli, 2006; Bookbinder & Brainerd, 2017; Bradley, Among estimator variables, a category including factors Greenwald, Petry & Lang, 1992; Kensinger, Garof-Eaton & that discount or augment the credibility of eyewitnesses Schacter, 2007; Laney, Campbell, Heuer & Reisberg, 2004). (Wells, 1978), which can be only considered post factum, A good example of the difculties in reconciling research emotions are often discussed. Crime is a stressful experience results is the issue of the weapon focus efect (WFE), a phe- for victims and for witnesses. Even an accidental bystander nomenon describing the allocation of attention resources on may become emotionally involved. The common suspicion highly emotive, threatening objects and, in consequence, and distrust we have about emotions and people showing reduced ability to describe or identify an ofender and other them have led us to consider them a source of memory details of the event. The overall signifcant diference in errors. However, as we will see, studies do not always con- identification accuracy in weapon-present and weapon- frm this notion. absent conditions has been demonstrated (Steblay, 1992; The question of how emotions impact the way crimi- Fawcett, Russell, Peace & Christie, 2013). However, Hulse nal events are remembered was frst asked by pioneers of and Memon (2006) showed that, while the presence of a applied psychology. One of the frst experiments on the weapon increases arousal, it does not always inhibit recog- subject, described in Münsterberg’s essay (1908/2009), was nition accuracy. Some studies also suggest that the efect conducted by von Liszt at the University of Berlin, at the may not be as general as usually presented (e.g. Carlson & beginning of the twentieth century. The experiment, which Carlson, 2012). simulated a life-threatening situation, showed that memories Therefore, the only consensus we can acknowledge is on of unexpected events accompanied by fear and a sense of the diferences in remembering emotional versus neutral danger are more distorted and misreported than emotionally stimuli. Especially as it is supported by evidence showing neutral events. distinct neural patterns of information processing depending There are many more recent studies that support this on the stimulus valence and arousal (Kensinger & Corkin, claim. It is considered that stressful stimuli negatively 2004). impact memory of perpetrator characteristics, pertinent In the light of many contradicting results, questions about actions, and details of crime scenes. The notion is evidenced their applicability outside laboratory settings, and concerns by laboratory experiments and case studies (Cliford & Hol- about the validity of conditions and mental states created in lin; 1981, Kuehn, 1974; Loftus & Burns, 1982, Southwick, a lab, the debate about the current state-of-the-art of eye- Morgan, Nicolaou, & Charney, 1997, Takahashi, Itsukush- witness testimony research is hardly surprising. However, ima & Okabe, 2006; for a meta-analysis see Defenbacher, acknowledgment that the research on eyewitnesses’ emo- Bornstein, Penrod, & McGorty, 2004). It is possible that tions may not refect reality is only the starting point. The negative emotions have detrimental efects on the recon- next step would be to discuss possible reasons why we are solidation of episodic memory through stress hormones still unsure how to estimate the impact of emotions experi- (Schwabe & Wolf, 2010).1 In consequence, as Bornstein enced by eyewitnesses on their memory performance. and Robicheaux (2008, p. 525) state: “the expert consensus on eyewitness memory and arousal is that in most respects, arousal exerts a negative efect on eyewitness performance”. How eyewitness testimony research goes However, if we take a closer look at the research results, astray the only obvious thing is that the infuence of emotions on testimony is far from obvious. There seems to be as much Two separate issues should be considered when systema- evidence of the negative impact of emotions on the reliability tising knowledge in this feld. The frst concerns the way memory is studied and discussed. In the author’s opinion, contradictions are essentially the result of excessive sim- 1 plifcations in the presentation of research results, and of However, as Payne et al. (2007) demonstrated, stress induced prior to the acquisition stage of memory enhances emotional long-term too far-reaching conclusions drawn from examination of a episodic memories. particular memory process. It seems that the infuence of 1 3 Psychological Research emotions on memory may not be broad and general, as it is theoretical framework. Furthermore, they only seemingly sometimes portrayed. The impact seems to vary depending relate to the approaches described above. In consequence, on memory function under investigation (recollection and as the concepts