NCJ Number
84269
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 6 Issue: 1 Dated: (1982) Pages: 15-30
Date Published
1982
Length
16 pages
Annotation
The knowledge of variables affecting eyewitness behavior, traditionally assumed by the American judiciary to be part of common understanding, was not evidenced in this study of citizen responses.
Abstract
The presumption is that a body of knowledge exists and is shared and that it conforms substantially to objective reality. Multiple choice format questionnaires designed to tap that knowledge were administered to 2 samples of college students (176) and 2 samples of the citizenry at large in Washington D.C., 46 of whom had not had criminal trial jury experience in the previous 5 years and 43 of whom had. Across samples, the typical respondent's performance was significantly above chance but not at all high in absolute terms. This typical performance involved well above-chance levels of accuracy on about half the items and not different from chance accuracy on the others. At least within the college student samples, certain demographic variables were not related to accuracy of response. Likewise, previous criminal trial jury experience did not improve accuracy for the Washington D.C. respondents by an amount that would be practically significant. It was concluded that the common understanding doctrine cannot in general be supported. Tables, footnotes, and 15 references are given. (Author abstract modified)