Using Stress and Warning to Improve Eyewitness Memory

在美国，错误的目击者报告导致了大约70%的误判(无罪项目，2016)。是什么导致了这些错误的报告？研究表明，目击者的记忆可能会被虚假或不准确的信息(错误信息)污染。通过采访和询问、与共同证人的讨论或从媒体和其他外部来源获得的信息，可能会接触到错误信息。鉴于这些是目击者经常面临的情况，研究人员必须了解如何减少对错误信息的敏感性，以便避免此类记忆错误。该项目旨在确定一种资源最少、以证据为基础的做法，可用于保护目击者记忆报告的完整性。这项研究将重点放在警告目击者注意虚假信息威胁的效果上。此前，警告已被纳入其他法律实践领域，并取得了巨大成功。例如，司法部(1999年)建议法律官员警告目击者，在进行指认之前，可能没有犯罪嫌疑人--这一做法大大减少了虚假身份。到2013年，约90%的接受调查的警察部门采用了这一做法。目前的项目使用认知和神经方法来测试类似的做法是否可以减少错误的目击者报告。研究小组将通过与当地法律界的研讨会传播结果，以确保这项研究对公众的影响。研究表明，当目击者被警告外部来源可能会污染事件的记忆时，记忆错误可以减少。例如，当被警告事件发生后向目击者提供的信息的真实性时，参与者不太可能将此类信息纳入记忆报告。然而，在接触到错误或不准确的信息(错误信息)后提供警告并不能完全消除错误信息错误。有没有一个最佳的时间来警告目击者？实验一将揭示最有效的时间来警告目击者错误信息的威胁。这些证据将对法律界特别有用。尽管有大量关于错误信息背景下的警告的研究，但还没有研究使用神经科学的方法--因此，警告如何调节神经活动以保护记忆仍然是未知的。因此，实验二将使用功能磁共振成像(FMRI)来检查警告调节神经活动的方式，以最终减少目击者的记忆错误。这项实验将直接加强我们对在目击者背景下支持人类记忆过程的复杂机制的理解。最后，值得注意的是，即使在学习和记忆的最佳条件下，也观察到了由于反复采访而导致的错误信息错误。因此，目击者所经历的内在压力--从目击事件发生时、在检索这类事件的过程中，一直延伸到法庭证词--可能会造成更大的记忆错误风险。因此，实验三将评估警告是否能降低目击者在压力条件下对错误信息的易感性。

Faulty eyewitness reports have contributed to approximately 70% of wrongful convictions in the United States (Innocence Project, 2016). What gives rise to such faulty reports? Research has revealed that eyewitness memory can be contaminated by false or inaccurate information (misinformation). Exposure to misinformation can occur through the course of interviews and questioning, discussions with co-witnesses, or from information garnered from the media and other external sources. Given that these are the circumstances routinely faced by eyewitnesses, it is imperative that researchers understand how to mitigate susceptibility to misinformation so that such memory errors can be avoided. This project aims to identify a resource-minimal, evidence-based practice that can be employed to protect the integrity of eyewitness memory reports. The research will focus on the effects of warning eyewitnesses about the threat of misinformation. Warnings have previously been incorporated into other areas of legal practice with great success. For example, the Department of Justice (1999) recommended that law officials warn eyewitnesses that a guilty suspect may not be present prior to conducting a lineup -- a practice that significantly reduces false identifications. By 2013, approximately 90% of surveyed police departments adopted this practice. The current project uses a cognitive and neural approach to test whether a similar practice can reduce faulty eyewitness reports. The research team will disseminate the results through seminars with local legal communities to assure the impact of this research on the public. Research reveals that memory errors can be reduced when eyewitnesses are warned that external sources can contaminate memory for an event. For example, when warned about the veracity of information given to an eyewitness after an event, participants were less likely to incorporate such information into memory reports. However, providing a warning after exposure to false or inaccurate information (misinformation) does not entirely eliminate misinformation errors. Is there an optimal time to warn eyewitnesses? Experiment One will reveal the most effective time to warn eyewitness about the threat of misinformation. Such evidence will be especially useful to the legal community. Despite a bulk of research on warning in the context of misinformation, no study has used neuroscientific methods --thus, how warning modulates neural activity to protect memory remains unknown. Accordingly, Experiment Two will employ functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine the manner in which warning modulates neural activity to ultimately reduce eyewitness memory errors. This experiment will directly enhance our understanding of the complex mechanisms that support human memory processes in the context of the eyewitness. Lastly, it is noteworthy that misinformation errors that are induced by repeated interviewing have been observed even under optimal conditions for learning and memory. Thus, the inherent stress experienced by eyewitnesses -- from the onset of the witnessed event, during the retrieval of such events, and extending to courtroom testimony -- may pose an even greater risk for memory errors. For this reason, Experiment Three will assess whether warning can reduce eyewitness susceptibility to misinformation under conditions of stress.