Establishing this dichotomy made it possible for critics to comprehend how psychological research could contribute to the legal system and allowed researchers to focus their efforts on issues that the legal system could implement. Although there was still some skepticism as to the use of eyewitness research in the legal field, the research gained some ground in 1978, when Gary Wells distinguished between estimator variables and system variables. This included Robert Buckhout, who demonstrated the prevalence of eyewitness identification errors. Her research spurred interest in the topic among her students and colleagues. Because of her rigorous methodological controls, she was able to both examine the quantity of eyewitness memory and assess the accuracy and quality of the remembered information. She demonstrated, using realistic stimuli such as videotaped and live events, that memory in general, including eyewitness memory, could be altered simply by the way in which the interviewer asked the question. It was not until the 1970s that eyewitness research was again brought to the forefront, this time by Elizabeth Loftus. He was the first researcher to examine issues related to eyewitness memory in a systematic and scientific manner. It is fair to say that Munsterberg’s research was not up to present-day methodological standards, but even with this caveat, the importance of his work cannot be diminished. Munsterberg’s research was met with quick criticism from John Henry Wigmore, who stated that psychological research was not of a nature that the legal system could use. Around the same time, Hugo Munsterberg released his book, On the Witness Stand, which examined problems associated with eyewitness memory as well as jurors’ inability to accurately assess eyewitness testimony. He was able to demonstrate that eyewitnesses are susceptible to error and that witnessing variables, such as emotions at the time of the event, can serve to affect the accuracy rate. Soon thereafter, William Stern actually applied this research directly to eyewitness testimony. Although his work did not have a profound influence on the legal system at the time, it was the beginning of empirical research involving witness testimony. The advent of psychological research related to the legal system can be traced to 1908, when Alfred Binet demonstrated that a person’s response to questioning could be influenced by the way in which the question was asked.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |