NCJ Number
115008
Journal
Journal of Applied Social Psychology Volume: 18 Issue: 14 Dated: (November 1988) Pages: 1241-1257
Date Published
1988
Length
17 pages
Annotation
This study replicates the finding from previous research that confabulation by eyewitnesses, particularly the complete fabrication of nonexistent actions, is rare.
Abstract
A total of 78 subjects, university undergraduates, witnessed a brief incident, and, after completing an unrelated filler task, were asked to write down their recollections of what happened. The design included orthogonal manipulations of the number of events per unit of time and the degree to which distorted descriptions were deliberately encouraged by the structure of the actions. Subjects' written narratives were content-analyzed and scored for correct statements and for the three subcategories of errors of commission. Previous research indicates that the most accurate testimony involves the unstructured recall of actions. These study results extend earlier work by revealing that the few errors that did occur were spread evenly across subjects, with most subjects making zero or one error and with no subjects making more than three errors. Action memory errors form a heterogeneous set; there were few commonly recurring or predictable errors. Attempts to increase error frequency by the use of suggestive implications and rapid action sequences were unsuccessful. Practical aspects of evaluating action memory testimony are discussed, with special reference to cases involving multiple eyewitnesses. 1 table, 25 references. (Author abstract modified)