Abstract
Previous research suggests that co-witness influence is heavily dependent on how eyewitnesses perceive the source of information, with perceived credibility, authority and memory accuracy identified as significant predictors. However, very little research has directly investigated the effects of perceived intelligence on co-witness influence. The present study used confederates to expose participants (N = 182) to misinformation about a witnessed event, prior to collecting their statements. Participants were paired up with a confederate who was presented as either a PhD student (high intelligence), police officer (high authority), neutral (no information provided) or completed the study individually (control). Results found that participants were significantly more likely to blame the wrong person for the crime if it had been suggested to them by a police officer or PhD student. Implications of the findings suggest that the characteristics and perceptions of co-witnesses can moderate the risks of statement contamination.
Highlights
Co-witness DiscussionsPost-event discussions (PEDs) amongst co-witnesses are a common occurrence; one report indicate that up to 86% of real-life eyewitnesses will discuss the event with their cowitnesses prior to giving evidence (Paterson and Kemp 2006)
The manifestation of a co-witness discussion can create significant problems for investigators by creating an environment where eyewitnesses are at risk of being misled by their co-witnesses into reporting inaccurate information within their statements—a process commonly known as memory conformity
Results indicated that participants perceived PhD students (M = 6.88, SD = 2.26) as being significantly more intelligent than police officers
Summary
Co-witness DiscussionsPost-event discussions (PEDs) amongst co-witnesses are a common occurrence; one report indicate that up to 86% of real-life eyewitnesses will discuss the event with their cowitnesses prior to giving evidence (Paterson and Kemp 2006). The manifestation of a co-witness discussion can create significant problems for investigators by creating an environment where eyewitnesses are at risk of being misled by their co-witnesses into reporting inaccurate information within their statements—a process commonly known as memory conformity (Mojtahedi 2017; Tousignant et al 1986; Wright et al 2000) This phenomenon has been extensively researched, with a consensus that exposure to misinformation during a PED can have negative effects on the memory recollection of eyewitnesses (Carlucci et al 2010; Gabbert et al 2004; Garry et al 2008; Mojtahedi et al 2017a; Mojtahedi et al 2019; Paterson and Kemp 2006). The study found that participants were significantly more likely to blame an innocent bystander for a crime, if their co-witness had blamed them
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
