IRIS login | Reed College home Volume 93, No. 4: December 2014
Photo by Darryl James.
Eyewitness testimony is the bedrock of the American justice system. When a witness picks a suspect out of a line-up or points to a defendant in a courtroom and says, “He did it,” the jury is duly impressed.
But our memories are anything but airtight. They are vague, porous, plastic, and fallible. Sometimes, without realizing it, we are capable of manufacturing false ones—a finding with dramatic implications for the courtroom.
Prof. Dan Reisberg’s [psychology 1986–] book begins with an introduction to science and research psychology, including a discussion of the admissibility of scientific research and expert witnesses. The subsequent chapters are divided by topics such as perception, memory, confessions, understanding the difference between lies and false memories, and children’s memories, with a particular focus on how children remember and report abuse.
Reisberg’s intent is not to invalidate the importance of eyewitness testimony. Throughout, he argues there are many instances in which our memories can be false, incomplete or fallible. But there are also times when a witness’s credibility can be strengthened by scientific research. If you’ve never been an eyewitness but now wonder about the memory of that conversation you had with your friend last week, worry not. “Human perception is generally accurate (and, in fact, rather precise),” Reisberg writes. “Likewise, human memory is, in general, relatively complete, long-lasting, and correct.”
The Oregon Supreme Court recently overhauled the state’s standards for eyewitness identification and granted a new trial to a man convicted of murder on the basis of a faulty eyewitness identification. The justices’ ruling relied, in part, on testimony from Reisberg, who frequently serves as an expert witness on perception, memory, and the ability of a witness to correctly remember events, faces, and conversations.
Reisberg worries that the legal system’s adversarial nature may cause some to receive his book with skepticism, but he hopes “that everyone in the justice system wants to maximize the quality of the information being considered and to seek ways of distinguishing good information from bad.”
LATEST COMMENTS
steve-jobs-1976 I knew Steve Jobs when he was on the second floor of Quincy. (Fall...
Utnapishtim - 2 weeks ago
Prof. Mason Drukman [political science 1964–70] This is gold, pure gold. God bless, Prof. Drukman.
puredog - 1 month ago
virginia-davis-1965 Such a good friend & compatriot in the day of Satyricon...
czarchasm - 4 months ago
John Peara Baba 1990 John died of a broken heart from losing his mom and then his...
kodachrome - 7 months ago
Carol Sawyer 1962 Who wrote this obit? I'm writing something about Carol Sawyer...
MsLaurie Pepper - 8 months ago
William W. Wissman MAT 1969 ...and THREE sisters. Sabra, the oldest, Mary, the middle, and...
riclf - 10 months ago