On the importance of considering heterogeneity in witnesses’ competence levels when reconstructing crimes from multiple witness testimonies

Aggregating information across multiple testimonies may improve crime reconstructions. However, different aggregation methods are available, and research on which method is best suited for aggregating multiple observations is lacking. Furthermore, little is known about how variance in the accuracy o...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Psychological research Ročník 81; číslo 5; s. 947 - 960
Hlavní autoři: Waubert de Puiseau, Berenike, Greving, Sven, Aßfalg, André, Musch, Jochen
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.09.2017
Springer Nature B.V
Témata:
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Crime
Data Collection - methods
Expert Testimony
Female
Humans
Majority rule
Male
Mental Competency - psychology
Mental Recall - physiology
Original Article
Psychology
Psychology Research
Witness Testimony
Simple Majority Rule
Majority Reconstruction
Individual Witness
Aggregation Method
ISSN:0340-0727, 1430-2772, 1430-2772
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Aggregating information across multiple testimonies may improve crime reconstructions. However, different aggregation methods are available, and research on which method is best suited for aggregating multiple observations is lacking. Furthermore, little is known about how variance in the accuracy of individual testimonies impacts the performance of competing aggregation procedures. We investigated the superiority of aggregation-based crime reconstructions involving multiple individual testimonies and whether this superiority varied as a function of the number of witnesses and the degree of heterogeneity in witnesses’ ability to accurately report their observations. Moreover, we examined whether heterogeneity in competence levels differentially affected the relative accuracy of two aggregation procedures: a simple majority rule, which ignores individual differences, and the more complex general Condorcet model (Romney et al., Am Anthropol 88(2):313–338, 1986 ; Batchelder and Romney, Psychometrika 53(1):71–92, 1988 ), which takes into account differences in competence between individuals. 121 participants viewed a simulated crime and subsequently answered 128 true/false questions about the crime. We experimentally generated groups of witnesses with homogeneous or heterogeneous competences. Both the majority rule and the general Condorcet model provided more accurate reconstructions of the observed crime than individual testimonies. The superiority of aggregated crime reconstructions involving multiple individual testimonies increased with an increasing number of witnesses. Crime reconstructions were most accurate when competences were heterogeneous and aggregation was based on the general Condorcet model. We argue that a formal aggregation should be considered more often when eyewitness testimonies have to be assessed and that the general Condorcet model provides a good framework for such aggregations.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0340-0727
1430-2772
1430-2772
DOI:10.1007/s00426-016-0802-1