Credibility Of Testimony Research Articles

The Testimony or the Eyewitness? Factors That Influence Eyewitness Credibility Assessment Conducted by (Future) Fact-Finders and Laypeople

ABSTRACT Purpose This study examined how the (in)consistency of eyewitness testimony and their relationship with the defendant affect assessments of eyewitness credibility and defendant culpability, along with decision confidence. Methods Judicial apprentices (N = 125) and students (N = 115) rated the guilt and credibility of testimony after reading a case summary. Results Eyewitness-defendant relationships influenced credibility judgements but not guilt assessments. Reminiscent details reduced credibility ratings and increased culpability judgements. Future judges exhibited greater confidence than laypeople. Conclusions The findings emphasize the need for ecologically valid research involving legal professionals to better understand evidence credibility and verdict decision-making.

Psychology of Witnesses and Victims in Establishing the Truth in Criminal Trials

This paper analyzes aspects pertaining to the psychology of witnesses and victims in criminal trials, by pointing out the influence of stress and trauma on the credibility of testimony. The importance of efficiently managing perjury is underlined to ensure an equitable trial. The paper points out the presence of psychological factors which play a crucial role in determining the credibility of testimony and in correctly recalling traumatic events.

중국 민사소송에서의 온라인 증언 방식에 관한 연구

The role of witnesses in uncovering the truth of a case is very important, and witness appearances in court hold significant meaning in civil litigation. However, witnesses often hesitate to appear due to a lack of time or the court being located far away. Additionally, fear of retaliation from the parties involved leads many witnesses to refuse to testify in court. This results in a low rate of witness appearances, which is recognized as a serious issue in Chinese civil litigation. The advancement of internet technology offers a solution to this problem. By allowing witnesses to testify online, it saves time and costs associated with testifying, and reduces direct contact between witnesses and parties, effectively protecting the safety of witnesses. Therefore, this method of online testimony provides a potential solution to increase witness court appearance rates. However, the current online testimony method has issues such as unclear nature, difficulty in accurately verifying witness identity, and challenges in ensuring the credibility of the testimony. To resolve these issues, it is first necessary to legally clarify the online testimony method as a form of court appearance testimony. Additionally, measures to strengthen the verification of witness identity should be implemented. For example, legislative measures to clearly define penalties for identity theft of witnesses, reinforcing judges' obligations to verify identities, and directly connecting online litigation platforms with systems of third-party agencies like police and administrative authorities to facilitate thorough identity verification. Such measures will prevent identity theft and accurately confirm the identity of witnesses, thus protecting the legitimate rights and interests of parties and enhancing the fairness and efficiency of litigation. Furthermore, to strengthen the credibility of testimony, the following measures can be considered: 1. Establish an online oath system for witnesses, ensuring they understand the legal consequences of false testimony. 2. Emphasize the importance of adhering to court order, ensuring that witnesses follow the same rules online as they would in an offline court. 3. Adhere to the principle of isolated examination, preventing witnesses from being influenced by other witnesses or participants. 4. Utilize the cross-examination method from common law systems to enhance the credibility of testimonies. In conclusion, the method of online testimony can be a useful tool to increase witness court appearance rates, but effective utilization requires legal, technical, and institutional improvements.

"Emotional Truth"

People of color speaking on their experiences are frequently discredited and disbelieved. A long theological, philosophical, scientific, and legal tradition has invalidated testimony from people of color and constructed a rigid and ultimately reductive definition of “truth”; moreover, racialization and oppression are lived experiences that are extremely difficult to articulate, often involving interactions in which racism is not explicitly apparent to non-marginalized people. The insidious nature of racism has forced non-white philosophers, writers, and artists to be creative in crafting tools to express the “emotional truth” of the experience of marginalization. White listeners must approach these works with humility and openness, employing a “hermeneutic of charity” and exercising empathy. This framework enables the questioning and reimagining of white supremacist notions of truth, aiming to center marginalized individuals’ experiences and include the “emotional truth” as a legitimate element of credible testimony.

Testimonial justice and the voluntarism problem: the virtue of just acceptance

ABSTRACT This paper examines the ‘voluntarism’ challenge for achieving testimonial justice and advocates the virtue of just acceptance of testimony as the right target for efforts to alleviate testimonial injustice. First, we review the credibility deficit case of interpersonal testimonial injustice and explain how the doxastic voluntarism problem poses a challenge to redressing such testimonial injustice. Specifically, the voluntarism problem seems to rule out straightforward control over what and whom people believe; thus, the solution to the problem of testimonial injustice cannot lie in voluntarily self-correcting unjust credibility judgements and replacing them with just testimonial beliefs. Second, we identify three distinctive characteristics of acceptance of testimony, as distinct from belief, and argue that, while it might be difficult to form credibility judgements completely voluntarily, it is easier to control one’s attitude of acceptance towards a speaker’s testimony. We hold that shifting focus from testimonial belief to acceptance can overcome the problem of (synchronic) involuntarism about testimonial belief. Third, we articulate a vision of a virtue of just acceptance of testimony that can move a hearer to collect the right evidence to reliably find the answer to whether a speaker’s testimony is true. Finally, we demonstrate that encouraging people to take a virtuous attitude of just acceptance towards a speaker’s testimony forms the basis of a remedial vision of education that can play a distinctive role in fostering the virtue of just acceptance aimed at testimonial justice.

Young People's Expectations Towards a High School Catechist − Research Report

English translation. The original article can be found here
 Religion teachers play a unique role in educating the young generation. In addition to the tasks assigned to all teachers in general, they are to support students in their spiritual development, conditioning their ability to understand themselves, build their own identity, and give meaning to their lives. Catechists face a difficult task, because young people, although they are very interested in religion and spirituality, also have many doubts, questions, and dilemmas in this sphere. The article aims to present the expectations of high school students towards catechists related to their personality traits, skills, psychosocial competencies, and their approach to pupils. Data obtained in a survey conducted with a group of 70 high school graduates show that young people need a catechist whom they can trust in the most important matter, which is the meaning of human life. Thus, they expect catechists to give a credible testimony of faith, have good substantive preparation, treat them subjectively like partners, and are ready to undertake an open dialogue with them.

'So Help Me God'? Does oath swearing in courtroom scenarios impact trial outcomes?

In countries such as Britain and the US, court witnesses must declare they will provide truthful evidence and are often compelled to publicly choose between religious ("oath") and secular ("affirmation") versions of this declaration. Might defendants who opt to swear an oath enjoy more favourable outcomes than those who choose to affirm? Two preliminary, pre-registered survey studies using minimal vignettes (Study 1, N = 443; Study 2, N = 913) indicated that people associate choice of the oath with credible testimony; and that participants, especially religious participants, discriminate against defendants who affirm. In a third, Registered Report study (Study 3, N = 1821), we used a more elaborate audiovisual mock trial paradigm to better estimate the real-world influence of declaration choice. Participants were asked to render a verdict for a defendant who either swore or affirmed, and were themselves required to swear or affirm that they would try the defendant in good faith. Overall, the defendant was not considered guiltier when affirming rather than swearing, nor did mock-juror belief in God moderate this effect. However, jurors who themselves swore an oath did discriminate against the affirming defendant. Exploratory analyses suggest this effect may be driven by authoritarianism, perhaps because high-authoritarian jurors consider the oath the traditional (and therefore correct) declaration to choose. We discuss the real-world implications of these findings and conclude the religious oath is an antiquated legal ritual that needs reform.

The Role of Coercion and Falsification in the Preparation of Stalin-era Interrogation Protocols

This article shows the problematic nature of modern studies that consider interrogation protocols of the Stalinist era to be reliable sources in their analyses. To begin with, these studies use primitive and inconsistent methodologies in their analysis of the interrogation protocols. Most of them approach the problem without the appropriate level of criticism, expressing little or no doubt about the content of these documents. Others, which claim to have adopted more specific methodological approaches, often base them on unverified hypotheses instead of empirically-proven principles. Secondly, these studies ignore recent work in neuroscience and cognitive, social, and clinical psychology that shows that coercion and torture undermine the ability of those under interrogation to give credible testimony. Biomedical studies have demonstrated that extremely stressful conditions (torture, coercion, blackmail, fear, deprivation of sleep and food, etc.) impair the function of the mind and erode its ability to retrieve reliable information from memory, especially affecting the accuracy and clarity of these recollections. Such techniques can significantly distort the testimony of detainees and even force those under interrogation to change their testimony, to repeat false information provided by the investigator or to falsely incriminate themselves. Thirdly, these studies overlook the fact that state security officials of that period systematically falsified interrogation protocols. Protocols, as a rule, were drawn up by the investigators and then were simply signed by those under interrogation — a practice that raises questions about how accurately these protocols convey the actual words, expressions and meanings contained in the elicited testimony. What’s more, many investigators are known to have often added details or to have embellished the confessions, while others made up entire conspiracies from scratch, before forcing the suspects to sign protocols recording their false confessions. This article illustrates these theses with evidence from the case of A. V. Putintsev, a state security investigator between 1941–1954.

When the solemnly enlivening RETURNS represent the crystallized culmination of an authentic poet’s unique body of work – Review of the work of Jozef Daník

Jozef Daník is again knocking on the hearts and minds of the Slovak soul longing for wisdom, truthfulness, tenderness and sincerity. No, we are not wrong. He comes convincingly, courageously and humanly with the aim of a credible testimony about times past, and present, but also those that repeat themselves in the individual stages of our life cycle and present themselves always in a different, deeply humanly felt, understood, but also painful form. Whatever Danik’s life experiences, opinions and attitudes were influenced by a furore of not exactly the most optimistic, often very diverse, complicated and dramatic experiences, but nevertheless the gifts of life, which understandably include not only joy, wellbeing, but also sadness, fears and sorrow, in his artistic world clearly prevails an inexhaustible desire for a full, harmonious, dignified, optimistic and nonconflicting earthly existence. Daník is a sensitive poet and invites us nonviolently into the world of his thoughts, experiences, feelings and attitudes. He does not impose himself, but the stamp of his personality, his artistic vision of the world does not leave us indifferent.

A “Brilliant Talk” and a “Stirring Appeal”: How Women of Grand Rapids, Michigan, Built an Audience for the Ballets Russes in 1917

A “Brilliant Talk” and a “Stirring Appeal”: How Women of Grand Rapids, Michigan, Built an Audience for the Ballets Russes in 1917

Assessment of Credibility of Testimony in Alleged Intimate Partner Violence: A Case Report

ABSTRACT Structured assessment of witness credibility in intimate partner violence (IPV) allegations has been well established for child custody purposes, although it is far from being systematically implemented, particularly when child custody is not at stake. Unstructured approaches may follow general, long-accepted guidelines in legal proceedings but ignore empirical knowledge about perpetrators and victims produced by years of cumulative research. Furthermore, judgments are at a high risk of being compromised by characteristics of the informant, the listener, and the situation. An accurate analysis of witness credibility is harder to accomplish and more essential when there is no conclusive evidence or when the alleged perpetrator denies the accusations and has no known history of interpersonal violence. To not believe real victims or wrongfully convict innocent individuals are miscarriages of justice that might be prevented to a certain extent if we improve credibility assessment accuracy. In this case report, I used a structured method that demonstrates how a conclusion about the credibility of an alleged victim of IPV can contrast with the conclusion produced by a trial judge. A structured credibility assessment of the alleged victim could have produced a different judgment. Implications for individuals, their families, and the justice system are discussed.

Dowód z zeznań niewolników w procesach o crimen maiestatis

<p>According to the rule being in force in Republican Rome, the slave testimony could not be used to the detriment of their owners, in particular in cases punishable by death (<em>in caput domini</em>), and the slaves could not bring charges against the owners. The few crimes in which exceptions were permitted was the crime of majesty. This article presents the most important views of Roman authors on the credibility of testimony given under torture and also explains the reasons for using torture in interrogating slaves. During the Principate period, the ban on interrogating slaves against their owners in <em>maiestas</em> cases was circumvented and then was abolished by imperial constitutions. During the Dominate period, the crime of lese-majesty was the only one in which a slave was allowed to accuse his master.</p>

Violence risk assessment in forensic psychology office: from childhood to elderly

Introduction The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the work developed by the Forensic Psychology Office (GPF) at Forensic Sciences and Psychology Laboratory located at the Egas Moniz Higher Education School. GPF’s main goals are performing forensic psychological assessments, especially violence risk assessments, as well as scientific research. The main purpose of violence risk assessment is the prevention and development of management strategies to minimise risk and try to identify factors that may contribute to the violent behaviour [1] supporting the criminal justice system in allocating more appropriate measures (e.g. sentence, intervention) [2]. GPF presents itself as the main response to cases with higher complexity and it provides guidance about the necessary measures to protect victims [3,4]. Materials and methods This is a quantitative study and the sample (n = 90) is derived from violence risk assessments of GPF (2016–2019). We evaluate 52 victims: 39 women/girls and 13 man/boys, aged between 5 and 95 years old (M = 33.04, SD = 21.82); and 38 defendants: 30 men and 8 women, aged between 23 and 82 years old (M = 44.64, SD = 14.75). Data was collected from lawsuits, semi-structured interviews of the victims and defendants, collateral information and clinical and forensic assessment tools. All participants signed an informed consent term, which contained the purpose of the assessment, the limits of the confidentiality, and also information about the ethics and technicians impartiality. All ethical principles have been taken due to the sensitive nature of the data involved and the respective informed consent. Results In 90 criminal processes assessed, 66 cases was about reported situations of domestic violence. In these cases the relationship between victims and defendants was: 33 ex-partners; 12 ex-spouses; 10 ex-boyfriend/girlfriend; 6 married; 3 parents and 2 son/daughter. We assessed 11 child abuse cases (5 parents; 3 relatives; 2 son/daughter; 1 stepdaughter). We also evaluate 9 child sex abuse cases (2 son/daughter; 2 classmates; 2 stepdaughters; 2 relatives and 1 stranger). Finally, we evaluate 4 elderly abuse cases (2 relatives; 1 son/daughter and 1 parent). In the violence risk assessments, most of the cases presented high risk level (n = 33, 36.7%), followed by moderate risk (n = 23, 25.6%) and low risk (n = 11, 12.2). In defendant’s testimony credibility, 39.5% (n = 15) was undetermined, 34.2% probably not credible (n = 13), 7.9% (n = 3) probably credible and 2.6% (n = 1) did not collaborate in the assessment. In victim’s credibility of testimony, 73.1% (n = 38) was probably credible, 15.4% (n = 8) undetermined and 3.8% (n = 2) probably not credible. Discussion and conclusions Higher and moderate risk are the most common levels in the Office assessed cases. These results demonstrate evidences of violence risk assessment importance in criminal justice system and an good practices example between Forensic Psychology and Law. Currently, through psychological assessment protocols defined for this purpose, the GPF has contributed to supporting the criminal justice system in allocating measures that are more appropriate to protect victims.

Kesaksian Non Muslim dalam Putusan Hakim Pengadilan Agama Curup Nomor 571/Pdt. G/2016

The focus of the study of this article is on the Decision of the Curup Religious Court Judge number 571 / Pdt. G / 2016, which received testimony from non-Muslims. The classical fiqh scholars have formulated that Islam is one of the conditions that must be met in order to receive witnesses or testimony in a trial. As for the non-Muslim witnesses, the fiqh scholars have different opinions. Imam al-Syafi'i flatly rejected it. Other fiqh scholars, from the Hanafiah, Maliki and Hanabilah circles, accept non-Muslim testimonies in certain cases and circumstances. This article examines two issues, first, what the judges consider accepting non-Muslims as witnesses, and second; how is the view from the Maqâshid al-Syari`ah side. These two problems were analyzed descriptively qualitatively, using the content analysis method and the Maqâshid al-Syari`ah analysis approach. This article concludes: First, the judge's consideration of receiving non-Muslim testimony in the Curup Religious Court Judge's Decision number 571 / Pdt. G / 2016 is due to the absence of Muslim witnesses. Second, in the perspective of Maqâshid al-Syariah, the acceptance of testimony from non-Muslims in the absence of Muslim witnesses becomes a conditional need so that the case process can be resolved properly and fairly, lâ dharâra wala dhirâr, leading to the maintenance of the benefits of marriage. When Muslim witnesses are not found (absent), the testimony of non-Muslims can be categorized as the benefit of the hajiyat level. namely the level of benefit needed to provide convenience and eliminate difficulties in implementing legal provisions.

Time Sensitivity and Acceptance of Testimony

Time Sensitivity and Acceptance of Testimony

Historia, ficción y evidencialidad en la épica colonial

This paper aims to consider Martin del Barco Centenera’s Argentina y conquista del Río de la Plata (1602) as a blending of history and fiction, in the context of an epistemic revolution that took place during the European Renaissance Era and the preceptive reading of Aristotle’s Poetics in Italy and Spain. This paper exposes how this epic poem was elaborated with evidentially modalizations and other rhetoric resources to provide a credible testimony and its moralizating point of view.

Ekwiwalencja przekładu w kontekście oceny wiarygodności zeznań świadka

Equivalence of Written Translation in the Context of the Assessment of the Credibility of Witness TestimonyThis article presents a study on the equivalence of written translation in the context of the assessment of the credibility of witness testimony. Part one examines psychological criteria for assessing the credibility of testimony and linguistic indicators of deception that formed the theoretical basis of the study. Translations gathered during the study were analyzed linguistically and compared with original in order to categorize the errors and mistakes made by translators before and after learning the criteria of statements credibility assessment in training. The article also presents a comparative analysis of the assessments made by expert judges with regard to both the original testimonies and the translations thereof. The results of the statistical analysis showed that there are certain differences in the assessment of an original and its translation, and knowledge of the criteria for determining the credibility of a witness’s testimony has a positive impact on translation equivalence.

The impact of hedged testimony on judgments of credibility

SummaryWe tested whether people are attuned to critical memory factors, such as age at the timing of encoding and hedge words when judging the credibility of testimony. In two experiments, participants read a 19‐year‐old's testimony regarding a sexual assault. We manipulated whether participants learned that the assault occurred 4 years ago (when the claimant was 15 years old) or 15 years ago (when the claimant was 4 years old) and whether the claimant used hedge words in her testimony. In Experiment 2, we included a cross‐examination. Without the cross‐examination, participants rated the testimony as more credible when the assault had occurred 15 years ago. However, with the inclusion of a cross‐examination, participants rated the testimony more reliable when the event occurred 4 years ago and the claimant did not use hedge words. We discuss the implications our results have, particularly for historical cases, where memory is a key factor.

Alternative Facts & Fake News

Research Article| October 01 2018 Alternative Facts & Fake News Departmental Editor: Douglas Allchin Douglas Allchin Departmental Editor Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The American Biology Teacher (2018) 80 (8): 631–633. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2018.80.8.631 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Douglas Allchin; Alternative Facts & Fake News. The American Biology Teacher 1 October 2018; 80 (8): 631–633. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2018.80.8.631 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe American Biology Teacher Search “Mendacity!” Big Daddy repeatedly exclaims in Tennessee Williams's classic drama Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. “Do you know what that is?” he continues in his deep Southern drawl. “It's lies and liars!” Big Daddy was talking about hidden family secrets, but he might just as well have been talking about anti-vaxxers, climate change deniers, or other purveyors of public disinformation. The discounting and outright dismissal of facts has become big business of late. The process of finding and confidently ascertaining facts is central to science. But also outside of science. For example, investigative journalists probe current events, often seeking newsworthy information that certain interests try to hide from public view. Military intelligence experts seek credible testimony and evidence about national security risks. Grand juries hear from witnesses and assess evidence in pursuit of criminal justice. They all rely on the same methods as science – to justify claims... You do not currently have access to this content.

CREDENTIALING DECISIONS AND CRIMINAL RECORDS: A NARRATIVE APPROACH*

AbstractDecision makers such as employers and state occupational licensing officials are often encouraged or required to incorporate evidence of rehabilitation into hiring decisions when applicants have criminal records. Current policy movements at the local, state, and federal levels may increase the use of such individualized assessments. Yet little is known about which types of information these decision makers use, how they evaluate evidence, and how they ultimately make determinations. We examine a sample of 50 unarmed security guard licensing decisions in New York State using content analysis. We find that administrative law judges rely on a narrative framework to document whether applicants currently have a prosocial identity and merit licensure. Judges typically describe one of two prosocial identity narratives for successful applicants: The applicant demonstrates achieving meaningful change, or his or her criminal record represents an aberration. Two factors seem vital to these assessments: applicants’ postconviction trustworthiness, as demonstrated through good conduct or inferred through positive appraisals, and credible testimony. In narrative explanations, personal responsibility and adult milestones are often discussed, reflecting a judicial nod to the notion of a “transition to adulthood.” The results hold implications for scholars and policy makers examining employment barriers, stigma remediation, and collateral sanctions for individuals with criminal records.