Extracting the truth from conflicting eyewitness reports: a formal modeling approach

Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the case, one approach to reconstruct the details of a crime more accurately is aggregating across individual reports. Although aggregation likel...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. Applied Jg. 18; H. 4; S. 390
Hauptverfasser: Waubert de Puiseau, Berenike, Aßfalg, André, Erdfelder, Edgar, Bernstein, Daniel M
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: United States 01.12.2012
Schlagworte:
ISSN:1939-2192, 1939-2192
Online-Zugang:Weitere Angaben
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Abstract Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the case, one approach to reconstruct the details of a crime more accurately is aggregating across individual reports. Although aggregation likely improves accuracy, the degree of improvement largely depends on the method of aggregation. The most straightforward method is the majority rule. This method ignores individual differences between eyewitnesses and selects the answer shared by most eyewitnesses as being correct. We employ an alternative method based on cultural consensus theory (CCT) that accounts for differences in the eyewitnesses' knowledge. To test the validity of this approach, we showed 30 students 1 of 2 versions of a video depicting a heated quarrel between 2 people. The videos differed in the amount of information pertaining to the critical event. Participants then answered questions about the critical event. Analyses based on CCT rendered highly accurate eyewitness competence estimates that mirrored the amount of information available in the video. Moreover, CCT estimates resulted in a more precise reconstruction of the video content than the majority rule did. This was true for group sizes ranging from 4 to 15 eyewitnesses, with the difference being more pronounced for larger groups. Thus, through simultaneous consideration of multiple witness statements, CCT provides a new approach to the assessment of eyewitness accuracy that outperforms standard methods of information aggregation.
AbstractList Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the case, one approach to reconstruct the details of a crime more accurately is aggregating across individual reports. Although aggregation likely improves accuracy, the degree of improvement largely depends on the method of aggregation. The most straightforward method is the majority rule. This method ignores individual differences between eyewitnesses and selects the answer shared by most eyewitnesses as being correct. We employ an alternative method based on cultural consensus theory (CCT) that accounts for differences in the eyewitnesses' knowledge. To test the validity of this approach, we showed 30 students 1 of 2 versions of a video depicting a heated quarrel between 2 people. The videos differed in the amount of information pertaining to the critical event. Participants then answered questions about the critical event. Analyses based on CCT rendered highly accurate eyewitness competence estimates that mirrored the amount of information available in the video. Moreover, CCT estimates resulted in a more precise reconstruction of the video content than the majority rule did. This was true for group sizes ranging from 4 to 15 eyewitnesses, with the difference being more pronounced for larger groups. Thus, through simultaneous consideration of multiple witness statements, CCT provides a new approach to the assessment of eyewitness accuracy that outperforms standard methods of information aggregation.
Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the case, one approach to reconstruct the details of a crime more accurately is aggregating across individual reports. Although aggregation likely improves accuracy, the degree of improvement largely depends on the method of aggregation. The most straightforward method is the majority rule. This method ignores individual differences between eyewitnesses and selects the answer shared by most eyewitnesses as being correct. We employ an alternative method based on cultural consensus theory (CCT) that accounts for differences in the eyewitnesses' knowledge. To test the validity of this approach, we showed 30 students 1 of 2 versions of a video depicting a heated quarrel between 2 people. The videos differed in the amount of information pertaining to the critical event. Participants then answered questions about the critical event. Analyses based on CCT rendered highly accurate eyewitness competence estimates that mirrored the amount of information available in the video. Moreover, CCT estimates resulted in a more precise reconstruction of the video content than the majority rule did. This was true for group sizes ranging from 4 to 15 eyewitnesses, with the difference being more pronounced for larger groups. Thus, through simultaneous consideration of multiple witness statements, CCT provides a new approach to the assessment of eyewitness accuracy that outperforms standard methods of information aggregation.Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the case, one approach to reconstruct the details of a crime more accurately is aggregating across individual reports. Although aggregation likely improves accuracy, the degree of improvement largely depends on the method of aggregation. The most straightforward method is the majority rule. This method ignores individual differences between eyewitnesses and selects the answer shared by most eyewitnesses as being correct. We employ an alternative method based on cultural consensus theory (CCT) that accounts for differences in the eyewitnesses' knowledge. To test the validity of this approach, we showed 30 students 1 of 2 versions of a video depicting a heated quarrel between 2 people. The videos differed in the amount of information pertaining to the critical event. Participants then answered questions about the critical event. Analyses based on CCT rendered highly accurate eyewitness competence estimates that mirrored the amount of information available in the video. Moreover, CCT estimates resulted in a more precise reconstruction of the video content than the majority rule did. This was true for group sizes ranging from 4 to 15 eyewitnesses, with the difference being more pronounced for larger groups. Thus, through simultaneous consideration of multiple witness statements, CCT provides a new approach to the assessment of eyewitness accuracy that outperforms standard methods of information aggregation.
Author Waubert de Puiseau, Berenike
Bernstein, Daniel M
Aßfalg, André
Erdfelder, Edgar
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Berenike
  surname: Waubert de Puiseau
  fullname: Waubert de Puiseau, Berenike
  organization: Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn, Germany
– sequence: 2
  givenname: André
  surname: Aßfalg
  fullname: Aßfalg, André
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Edgar
  surname: Erdfelder
  fullname: Erdfelder, Edgar
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Daniel M
  surname: Bernstein
  fullname: Bernstein, Daniel M
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23088437$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpNkEtLxDAUhYOMOA8Ff4Fk6aaa3HTaXHcyjA8YcDOuS5ImTqVtapKi8-8dGQVX53DPx7lw5mTS-94ScsnZDWeivFWMAUrGT8iMo8AMOMLkn5-SeYzvjDGJmJ-RKQgmZS7KGdmuv1JQJjX9G007S1MY04664DtqfO_a5hjZvf1sUm9jpMEOPqR4RxV1PnSqpZ2vbftDqWEIXpndOTl1qo324lcX5PVhvV09ZZuXx-fV_SZTOeMpU-BqUGAKo7nUegk5yAKFAqwN5gVq1IcT4tKUoLQx4BxHq8vcyaUxDGBBro-9h7cfo42p6ppobNuq3voxVhxKIViBZX5Ar37RUXe2robQdCrsq78l4BvKOGF8
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1177_0081175014529767
crossref_primary_10_1007_s12671_022_01956_x
crossref_primary_10_1177_0265407517724600
crossref_primary_10_5406_amerjpsyc_128_1_0061
ContentType Journal Article
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1037/a0029801
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod no_fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Psychology
EISSN 1939-2192
ExternalDocumentID 23088437
Genre Journal Article
GroupedDBID ---
-DZ
0R~
29K
354
5GY
5VS
7RZ
8VB
9M8
ABIVO
ABNCP
ABVOZ
ACGFO
ACPQG
AEHFB
AEMOZ
AETEA
AHQJS
AI.
AKVCP
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AWKKM
AZXWR
CGNQK
CGR
CS3
CUY
CVF
D-I
EBR
EBU
ECM
EIF
EMK
EPA
F5P
FTD
HVGLF
HZ~
ISO
K1G
LW5
NPM
O9-
OPA
OVD
P2P
PHGZM
PHGZT
QWB
ROL
SES
SPA
TEORI
TH9
TN5
UHS
UPT
VH1
WH7
YQT
ZL0
ZPI
3KI
7X8
PUEGO
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-a401t-a2fd2a2c6cb18bb52428693a29dc9469b9b242995c72abcc2ff19eb74f85cc022
IEDL.DBID 7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount 19
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000312919800005&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 1939-2192
IngestDate Wed Oct 01 14:05:24 EDT 2025
Mon Jul 21 06:02:17 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 4
Language English
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-a401t-a2fd2a2c6cb18bb52428693a29dc9469b9b242995c72abcc2ff19eb74f85cc022
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
PMID 23088437
PQID 1273306974
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_1273306974
pubmed_primary_23088437
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2012-12-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2012-12-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 12
  year: 2012
  text: 2012-12-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle Journal of experimental psychology. Applied
PublicationTitleAlternate J Exp Psychol Appl
PublicationYear 2012
SSID ssj0008994
Score 2.0893373
Snippet Eyewitnesses often report details of the witnessed crime incorrectly. However, there is usually more than 1 eyewitness observing a crime scene. If this is the...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 390
SubjectTerms Crime
Humans
Mental Recall
Models, Theoretical
Title Extracting the truth from conflicting eyewitness reports: a formal modeling approach
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23088437
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1273306974
Volume 18
WOSCitedRecordID wos000312919800005&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV07T8MwELaAMnTh_SgvGYnVamMnccyCEGrFQtWhSN0i27GhEkpLkwL995ydhE5ISCzJkEsUnc533_l83yF0A0YTJVlmCVNUkdCEEVHMxiTWgF-Vkj3GrB82wYfDZDIRo3rDraiPVTY-0TvqbKbdHnk3gDgL8Bbg7938nbipUa66Wo_Q2EQtBlDGWTWfrNnCIZeoq8qCwMqkDfks413pucd7we_A0geYwe5_f20P7dTQEt9XtrCPNkx-gNo_Hm51iMb9r9J3ReUvGIAfLhfL8hW7DhOsm_YQeGRW5nNaOh-I65LCLZbYo9s37EfnOKmGjfwIPQ_644dHUo9VIBKSqZJIajMqqY61ChKlIgjSSSyYpCLTArJlJRR1USrSnEqlNbU2EEbx0CaR1hDzj9FWPsvNKcIs5AZkAXPAzXAjQFCqkIVSwqe57aDrRmMpmK2rRcjczJZFutZZB51Uak_nFb9GCllRkoSMn_3h7XPUBghDqwMmF6hlYdGaS7StP8ppsbjy9gDX4ejpG_9nwZY
linkProvider ProQuest
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Extracting+the+truth+from+conflicting+eyewitness+reports%3A+a+formal+modeling+approach&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+experimental+psychology.+Applied&rft.au=Waubert+de+Puiseau%2C+Berenike&rft.au=A%C3%9Ffalg%2C+Andr%C3%A9&rft.au=Erdfelder%2C+Edgar&rft.au=Bernstein%2C+Daniel+M&rft.date=2012-12-01&rft.issn=1939-2192&rft.eissn=1939-2192&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=390&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037%2Fa0029801&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1939-2192&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1939-2192&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1939-2192&client=summon