23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The fallibility of memory in judicial processes: Lessons from the past and their modern consequences

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The capability of adult and child witnesses to accurately recollect events from the past and provide reliable testimony has been hotly debated for more than 100 years. Prominent legal cases of the 1980s and 1990s sparked lengthy debates and important research questions surrounding the fallibility and general reliability of memory. But what lessons have we learned, some 35 years later, about the role of memory in the judicial system? In this review, we focus on what we now know about the consequences of the fallibility of memory for legal proceedings. We present a brief historical overview of false memories that focuses on three critical forensic areas that changed memory research: children as eyewitnesses, historic sexual abuse and eyewitness (mis)identification. We revisit some of the prominent trials of the 1980s and 1990s to not only consider the role false memories have played in judicial decisions, but also to see how this has helped us understand memory today. Finally, we consider the way in which the research on memory (true and false) has been successfully integrated into some courtroom procedures.

          Related collections

          Most cited references129

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Planting misinformation in the human mind: a 30-year investigation of the malleability of memory.

          E Loftus (2005)
          The misinformation effect refers to the impairment in memory for the past that arises after exposure to misleading information. The phenomenon has been investigated for at least 30 years, as investigators have addressed a number of issues. These include the conditions under which people are especially susceptible to the negative impact of misinformation, and conversely when are they resistant. Warnings about the potential for misinformation sometimes work to inhibit its damaging effects, but only under limited circumstances. The misinformation effect has been observed in a variety of human and nonhuman species. And some groups of individuals are more susceptible than others. At a more theoretical level, investigators have explored the fate of the original memory traces after exposure to misinformation appears to have made them inaccessible. This review of the field ends with a brief discussion of the newer work involving misinformation that has explored the processes by which people come to believe falsely that they experienced rich complex events that never, in fact, occurred.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Suggestibility of the child witness: a historical review and synthesis.

            The field of children's testimony is in turmoil, but a resolution to seemingly intractable debates now appears attainable. In this review, we place the current disagreement in historical context and describe psychological and legal views of child witnesses held by scholars since the turn of the 20th century. Although there has been consistent interest in children's suggestibility over the past century, the past 15 years have been the most active in terms of the number of published studies and novel theorizing about the causal mechanisms that underpin the observed findings. A synthesis of this research posits three "families" of factors--cognitive, social, and biological--that must be considered if one is to understand seemingly contradictory interpretations of the findings. We conclude that there are reliable age differences in suggestibility but that even very young children are capable of recalling much that is forensically relevant. Findings are discussed in terms of the role of expert witnesses.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Jeopardy in the courtroom: A scientific analysis of children's testimony.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Memory
                Memory
                PMEM
                pmem20
                Memory (Hove, England)
                Routledge
                0965-8211
                1464-0686
                4 July 2015
                23 February 2015
                : 23
                : 5
                : 633-656
                Affiliations
                [ a ]Department of Psychology, Centre for Memory and Law, City University London , London, UK
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Mark L. Howe, Department of Psychology, Centre for Memory and Law, City University London , Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK. E-mail: Mark.Howe.1@ 123456city.ac.uk
                Article
                1010709
                10.1080/09658211.2015.1010709
                4409058
                25706242
                3a53f987-7557-4b18-8a6e-56b7cd3271b7
                © 2015 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License ( http://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.

                History
                : 20 January 2015
                : 20 January 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 1, References: 99, Pages: 24
                Funding
                Funded by: Economic and Social Research Council 10.13039/501100000269
                Award ID: RES-062-23-3327
                The writing of this article was supported by a project grant [grant number RES-062-23-3327] from the Economic and Social Research Council to MLH.
                Categories
                Invited Review

                Neurosciences
                false memories,childhood memories,memory evidence,eyewitness identification,forensic interviewing,expert witnesses

                Comments

                Comment on this article