Law Journal Library - Skip to main content
Content Start

Click here to view short-term subscription options to access this document.

19 Jurimetrics J. 1 (1978-1979)
Eyewitness Testimony: The Dangers of Guessing

handle is hein.journals/juraba19 and id is 23 raw text is: £ ARICE

Reid Hastie,* Robert Landsmant
and Elizabeth F. Loftus
In Experiment 1, college students watched a series of slides depicting a
street crime. Some of the subjects were then asked a series of questions and
they were urged to guess at the answers if they were uncertain. Relative to
control subjects, those who guessed were more likely to commit false alarm
errors on a final test given later on. Experiment 2 showed that the confidence
level of a person who guesses about a detail can rise over time rather than
decline. It is argued that guessing can cause a change in a person's memorial
representation-guesses can fill in a vague and schematic representation
making it more vivid. These results have implications for the conduct of
police and courtroom interrogation procedures.
Psychologists have addressed the problem of evaluating the validity of
eyewitness testimony since the earliest days of experimental research on
human memory. Generally, researchers have concluded that eyewitness
reports provide a delicate, unreliable route to historical truth. Numerous
sources of error and failure have been revealed by research mimicking
the conditions obtained in natural eyewitness situations.'
The conditions under which the eyewitness is interrogated provide
one of the major sources of threats to testimony validity. These condi-
tions are under the control of legal and police authorities. A far from
rare practice involves, in essence, asking a witness who is not quite
*This work was supported in part by a grant from the National Science
Foundation to Reid Hastie and in part by a grant from the National Institutes of
Mental Health to Elizabeth Loftus. Please address all correspondence to E. Loftus,
Psychology Department, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195.
tHarvard University.
*University of Washington.
'Woocher, F. Did your eyes deceive you? Expert psychological testimony on
the unreliability of eyewitness identification, 29 STAN. L. REv. 1977, 969-1030.

FALL 1978

Already a Subscriber?

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is the world’s largest image-based and fully searchable legal and academic research database. Material contained in HeinOnline is an exact replication of the original printed product, and coverage is typically comprehensive. Contact us today for a free demo of this incredible resource.

We offer annual subscriptions to all HeinOnline collections to universities, colleges, law firms, individuals, and other institutions. To request a quote or trial, please click here.

Please note: the content in the Law Journal Library is constantly changing and some content has restrictions as required per the license. Therefore, please review the available content via the following link to ensure the material you wish to access is included in the database. For a complete list of content included in the Law Journal Library, please click here.

Learn More About the Law Journal Library (pdf)
Back To Top Jump To Bottom