Psychology & Law research project.

1. Holly A. Brennan & Ana G. Reyes
Tiffin University

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcywPdORySA
• Known for her extensive research on the
nature of false memories and the
misinformation effect.
• Memories are malleable!

4. Conducted research experiments in classrooms on
campus that involved live scenarios in order to:
Gauge the level of awareness by the students in
the classroom
i.e. Can the students identify specific
characterizes of the offender?
Administered a threat assessment

5. • Wells (1993) concluded that eyewitness errors are the single most
frequent cause of wrongful convictions
• The Innocence Project confirms Wells (1993) by stating,
eyewitness identification errors “play a roll in more than 75% of
convictions overturned through DNA testing”
(innocenceproject.org).
• There is a serious problem in the criminal justice system =
misidentification of offenders by witnesses of a different race
Ex: Steven Avery (1985)
Ex: Arthur Johnson (1992)

6. 1. Estimator Variables (cannot be controlled by the criminal justice
system): lighting, proximity, race, presence of a weapon, and stress
 “Identifications have proven to be less accurate when witnesses
are identifying perpetrators of a different race”
(innocenceproject.org)
 Assimilation of immigrants into the U.S. could make identifying
a particular race more difficult Ex: Ana Reyes
2. System Variables (criminal justice system can and should control):
ways that law enforcement agencies retrieve and record witness
memory i.e. lineups and photo arrays~ blind administration,
instructions to witnesses before identification procedures,
administration of lineups or photo arrays, and communication with
witnesses after they make an identification

7. 3. People make generalizations
4. Circumstantial evidence such as credit card records, fingerprint,
ballistics, and DNA analysis are often extremely reliable, but the
juries value eyewitness testimony more (Dorf, 2001), even
though it is the least dependable type of evidence (Aaronson,
2008).

8. Race (4)
Example: Can Caucasian eyewitnesses properly identify perpetrator(s) of a
different race, in this case African Americans?
Gender
• Can Female eyewitnesses properly identify perpetrator(s) of a different
gender (Male)?
• Can Male eyewitnesses properly identify perpetrator(s) of a different gender
(Female)?
Physical Characteristics
• Can eyewitnesses accurately describe what the perpetrator(s) were wearing?
• Can eyewitnesses accurately estimate the perpetrator(s) height?
• Can eyewitnesses accurately estimate the perpetrator(s) weight?

9. • African American
• Caucasian
• Hispanic/Latino
• Female
• Male
• Age
• Height
• Weight
• Eye color
• Hair color
• Clothing
• Lighting
• Time of day
• Physical Characteristics
• Glasses
• Location
• Major

10. Hypothesis 1: Researchers believed that regardless of gender, eyewitnesses
would have a difficult time identifying offenders of a different race.
Hypothesis 2: Researchers believed that Caucasians would have a difficult
time identifying African American offenders.
Hypothesis 3: Researchers believed that African Americans would have a
difficult time identifying Caucasian offenders.
Hypothesis 4: Researchers believed that regardless of the eyewitness’ race,
he/she would accurately identify an offender of the same race.
Hypothesis 5: Researchers believed that an eyewitness would feel more
threatened by an African American offender versus a Caucasian
offender.
Hypothesis 6: Researchers believed that an eyewitness would feel less
threatened by a female offender regardless of their race.
Hypothesis 7: Researchers believed that the duration of time influences
accurate identification of an offender.

11. 2x2x2 factorial, between persons, non-repeated measures design
Race of Eyewitness
AA C
AAA CA AAA CA
M F M F M F M F
AA= African American Eyewitness C= Caucasian Eyewitness
AAA= African American Actor CA= Caucasian Actor
M= Male Actor F= Female Actor

12. • 92 Tiffin University undergraduate students.
• Actors
 Students: 2 males (Gabe & Adam) and 2
females
 Professors: Tiffin University faculty members -
2 males and 2 females
(Stockner & Reinhard; Fankhauser &
Myers-Debbink)

14. • A script was given to each of the actors regarding a failing
midterm grade, which they were encouraged to follow
• Confrontation occurred between student actor and professor
actor
• The class of students were informed that what they had just
witnessed was part of an experiment -the students did not
have to participate in the questionnaire and threat assessment
if they did not want to
• Once the student signed the consent form, they were given a
questionnaire concerning the incident they had just witnessed
and a threat assessment

16. Caucasian females can properly identify a male
Caucasian perpetrator better than Caucasian
males.
F-test p-score is 0.037155 Statistically Significant
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Variable 1 Variable 2
Mean 4.6 5.307692
Variance 0.533333 1.564103
Observations 13 13
df 12 12
F 0.340984
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.037155
F Critical one-
tail 0.372213
F-test c1 M v. F
f= 0.32, p=.03715**

17. The threat assessment scores show that Caucasian
males are more threatened than Caucasian females
by a male Caucasian perpetrator.
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Variable
1
Variable
2
Mean 6.181538 6.126923
Variance 1.469697 0.406256
Observations 13 13
df 12 12
F 3.61766
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.017263
F Critical one-
tail 2.686637
F-test c2 M v. F
F=3.61, p=.017**
F-test p-score is 0.017263 Statistically Significant

18. The threat assessment scores show that Caucasian
females are more threatened than Caucasian males
by a female African-American perpetrator.
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Variable
1
Variable
2
Mean 12.78077 15.5
Variance 3.229808 14.95833
Observations 13 13
df 12 12
F 0.21592
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.006389
F Critical one-tail 0.372213
F-test c3 M v. F
F=.215, p=.006**
F-test p-score is 0.006389 Statistically Significant

19. Caucasian males can properly identify a
female Caucasian perpetrator better than
Caucasian females.
F-test p-score is 0.0000953175 Statistically Significant
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Variable 1
Variable
2
Mean 4.5 3.661538
Variance 0.625 0.055564
Observations 13 13
Df 12 12
F 11.2482695
P(F<=f) one-
tail 9.53175E-05
F Critical one-
tail 2.686637113
F-test c4 M v. F
F=11.2, p=.000009**

20. The threat assessment scores show that
Caucasian females are more threatened than
Caucasian males by a female
Caucasian perpetrator.
F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Variable
1
Variable
2
Mean 6.831538 11.83077
Variance 6.569447 2.097224
Observations 13 13
Df 12 12
F 3.132449
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.02945
F Critical one-
tail 2.686637
F-test c4 M v. F
F=3.13, p=.0294**
F-test p-score is 0.02945 Statistically Significant

21. 1. Number of subjects: It was an uncontrolled environment
because the researchers could not monitor class attendance.
2. The representation of the Tiffin University population in
general. According to the data, there were more Caucasian
males than African American males and females combined and
that does not accurately characterize Tiffin University’s student
body.
3. “Incident”- length, similarity, and script (some was improve)
4. Students trickling into class as the situation was about to play
out- They were not there for the whole scenario to enfold =
short eyewitness account

22. • Video record the scenarios so there are no
discrepancies
• Larger population
• Include Undergraduate and Graduate students

23. The American Psychology-Law Society recommends three
rules for identification procedures:
1) Blind line-up or photo spread
2) Explicitly instruct the witness that the person in question
may not be in the line-up
3) Do not make the suspect stand out from the fillers, get a
clear statement of the witness’s level of confidence
(Loftus et al., 2007)

24. References
Aaronson, D. E. (2008, Spring). Cross-racial identification of defendants in criminal cases - A proposed model jury
instruction. Retrieved September 20, 2011, from
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/cjust23&div=6&id=&page=.
Athaide-Victor, E. (2011, October 29). Eyewitness Testimony. PowerPoint presented at Tiffin
University, Tiffin, OH.
Barber, M. R. (1991, Februrary). Joyce Ann Brown: 'I spent nine years in prison for a crime I didn't commit'; Texas woman
tells the shocking story of her conviction and ordeal behind bars. Retrieved from FindArticles database.
Dorf, M. C. (2001). How reliable is eyewitness testimony?: A decision by New york state's highest court reveals unsettling
truths about juries. Retrieved October 28, 2011, from FindLaw database.
Garret, B., Wells, G., & Heinzel, P. (Speakers). (2011, August 29). Reliability of eyewitness testimony under scrutiny.
National Public Radio®.
Kentucky Innocence Project. (2011). Eyewitness misidentification. Kentucky, Department of Public Advocacy. Retrieved
from http://dpa.ky.gov/kip/mew.htm.

25. References cont.
Loftus, E. F., Doyle, J. M., & Dysart, J. E. (2007). Eyewitness testimony: Civil and criminal (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Matthew Bender & Company Inc.
Peloso, C. D. Law School Case Briefs: Manson v. Brathwaite. 432 U.S. 98, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977).
Rabiner, S. (2011). Eyewitness id evidence changed by landmark NJ supreme court decision. Retrieved November 28,
2011, from FindLaw database.
Reinhart, C. (2011). Summary of New Jersey Case on Eyewitness Identification: State v. Henderson, No. 62,218 (Aug. 24,
2011), http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/rpt/2011-R-0334.htm.
Walen, A. (2004). A recent exoneration underlines a basic truth: As long as we have the death penalty, we will inevitably
execute the innocent. Retrieved November 27, 2011, from FindLaw database.