• DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.56.5.405
• Corpus ID: 38409563

On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research. A new survey of the experts.

@article{Kassin2001OnT,
  title={On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research. A new survey of the experts.},
  author={Saul M. Kassin and V. Anne Tubb and Harmon M. Hosch and Amina Memon},
  journal={The American psychologist},
  year={2001},
  volume={56 5},
  pages={
          405-16
        }
}

• S. Kassin, V. A. Tubb, +1 author A. Memon
• Published 1 May 2001
• Psychology
• The American psychologist

In light of recent advances, this study updated a prior survey of eyewitness experts (S. M. Kassin, P. C. Ellsworth, & V. L. Smith, 1989). Sixty-four psychologists were asked about their courtroom experiences and opinions on 30 eyewitness phenomena. By an agreement rate of at least 80%, there was a strong consensus that the following phenomena are sufficiently reliable to present in court: the wording of questions, lineup instructions, confidence malleability, mug-shot-induced bias, postevent information, child witness suggestibility, attitudes and expectations, hypnotic suggestibility, alcoholic intoxication, the crossrace bias, weapon focus, the accuracy-confidence correlation, the forgetting curve, exposure time, presentation format, and unconscious transference. Results also indicate that these experts set high standards before agreeing to testify. Despite limitations, these results should help to shape expert testimony so that it more accurately represents opinions in the scientific community.