How Psychology’s Empirical Results Can Benefit the Criminal Justice System: Expert Testimony

<p>Brigham and Bothwell (1983) claimed that jurors have a scientifically incorrect view of eyewitness testimony. The purpose of this study was to examine the most beneficial way to assist the jury in dealing with eyewitness testimony. Duckworth, Kreiner, Stark-Wroblewski, and Marsh (2011) applied interactive participation in an eyewitness activity and expert testimony to a mock-jury dealing with eyewitness testimony and found that those who participated in the activity had significantly fewer convictions. The methodological framework of the Duckworth et al. study was applied to East Tennessee State University criminal justice undergraduates. Although this study did not find any significant effects in hearing expert testimony on empirical findings regarding eyewitness testimony or participating in an individual recall activity, cross tabulation frequencies indicated a directional pattern of relationship when independent variables were compared to the control group.</p>

Name thesis:degree_name

MA (Master of Arts)

Level thesis:degree_level

Thesis - unrestricted

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Criminal Justice and Criminology

Year dc:date.issued

2013

Author dc:creator

• McCurry, Ford C

• eyewitness testimony
• expert witness testimony
• eyewitness recall activity
• Psychology
• Social and Behavioral Sciences

Statement dc:rights

• Copyright by the authors.

Repository record dc:identifier

https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1166

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:dc.etsu.edu:etd-2331