RUI: The Dynamic Interaction Between Investigator and Eyewitness: Effects on Memory Reports and Interviewer Behavior

该奖项是根据2009年美国复苏和再投资法案（公法111-5）资助的。目击者是犯罪现场调查人员的重要信息来源。准确的信息有助于解决犯罪问题；不准确的信息会浪费调查人员的精力，甚至更糟，会导致错误的定罪。调查人员和目击者在信息收集过程中如何相互影响是本研究的基础。设计了三个实验阶段来解决：(a)调查员和目击者之间的互动是否会改变证人报告的准确性，以及(b)证人行为的改变是否会影响调查员提出的问题。在目击阶段的实验中，参与者-目击证人将观看一个事件并接受训练有素的调查人员的询问。调查人员将系统地改变在采访中提供给证人的反馈。将测量两个变量：证人是否改变其报告中提供的细节水平，以及作为调查员反馈的函数随其报告而附的信任水平。在调查员阶段，实验将集中在参与者调查员的行为上，因为他们采访了经过训练以特定方式回应的证人。例如，一些证人会在采访过程中提供越来越详细的报告。对于这一阶段的所有实验，将测量两个变量：调查人员的问题是否（以及如何）改变，证人准确性的评估是否作为证人行为变化的函数而改变。在动态访谈阶段，证人报告和调查员提问将在真实互动的背景下进行评估。因此，研究参与者将同时担任目击者和调查人员。在采访过程中，证人的准确性，证人的信心和调查员的问题的变化将再次被测量。在这三个实验阶段测试的操纵是目击者和调查人员在真实犯罪情况下可能经历的近似。因此，如果这些实验测量报告细节或准确性、证人信心或调查员提问策略的变化，则很有可能在真实的采访情况中发生类似的变化。这些实验的目的是为采访提供建议，以提高检索到的准确信息的数量，从而促进解决犯罪问题，减少错误定罪的可能性。

This award is funded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) Eyewitnesses are a crucial source of information for crime scene investigators. Accurate information facilitates crime solutions; inaccurate information leads to wasted investigator effort or, even worse, wrongful convictions. How investigators and eyewitnesses affect each other during this information-gathering process forms the foundation of this research. Three experimental phases were designed to address: (a) whether the interaction between an investigator and eyewitness can change the accuracy of witness reports, and (b) whether changing witness behavior can affect the questions asked by the investigator. In the Witness Phase experiments, participant-eyewitnesses will view an event and be questioned by trained investigators. Investigators will systematically vary the feedback provided to witnesses during the interview. Two variables will be measured: whether witnesses change the level of detail provided in their reports and the level of confidence accompanying their reports as a function of investigator feedback. In the Investigator Phase, experiments will focus on the behavior of participant-investigators as they interview witnesses who are trained to respond in certain ways. For example, some witnesses will produce reports that become increasingly more detailed over the course of the interview. For all experiments in this phase, two variables will be measured: whether (and how) investigators' questions change and whether assessments of witness accuracy change as a function of changing witness behavior. In the Dynamic Interview Phase, witness reporting and investigator questioning will be assessed in the context of real interactions. Consequently, research participants will serve as both eyewitnesses and investigators. Over the course of the interview, changes in witness accuracy, witness confidence and investigator questions will again be measured. The manipulations tested in these three experimental phases are approximations of what eyewitnesses and investigators might experience in real crime situations. Therefore, if these experiments measure changes in report detail or accuracy, witness confidence, or investigator questioning strategies, there is a good possibility that similar changes may occur in real interview situations. The goal of these experiments is to produce recommendations for interviews that may enhance the amount of accurate information retrieved, thereby facilitating solutions to crimes and decreasing the likelihood of wrongful convictions.