Previous Issue

Click the volume/article title to view article info and download full text.

Volume 10 Issue 2

Recognition and recall of vehicles and manufacturer symbols: Implications for eyewitness vehicle identifications

Allison, M., Overman, A. A., Braun, M., Campbell, M., & Price, J. R.

The purpose of this study was to examine people's recall and recognition of cars because some witnesses to crimes may see only the getaway car. We compared participants' accuracy in identifying vehicles and manufacturer symbols in a free recall versus recognition questionnaire format. Participants in the recognition condition were more accurate than those in the free recall condition on many of the questions. Across conditions, participants had the most difficulty in remembering the Mazda 3-Series Truck symbol and the Buick and Subaru symbols. The majority of participants were accurate at identifying the Jeep Grand Cherokee and the Honda symbols, and participants with more driving experience were more accurate on some of the questions. Men were more accurate than women on several of the vehicle questions, but on only one manufacturer symbol question. We discuss future eyewitness research and the implications of this study.

High-risk early adolescents' perceptions of jail and offender experiences

Folk, J. B., Dallaire, D. H., & Zeman, J. L.

Although a far-reaching phenomenon, little is known about youths' understanding of incarceration or offenders. Using mixed methods, this research assessed 106 youths' (M = 11.54 years; 56.6% girls; 78.3% Black) understanding of jail and offenders. Caregivers reported youth' exposure to the criminal justice system through parental arrest (42.5%) and incarceration (32.4%). Factors found to influence youths' understanding include age, gender, and parental involvement in the criminal justice system. Results from the current study offer a snapshot of high-risk youths' understanding of jail and offenders, as well as some factors that influence them. This information may be useful for those who work with children of incarcerated parents, where misconceptions may influence psychological adjustment and the need for targeted interventions is paramount.

Dynamic factors and the accuracy and validity of the Adolescent Chemical Dependency Inventory-Corrections Version II

Worthy, L. D.

Risk assessment has been applied widely in corrections settings; however, the appropriateness and psychometric properties often are overlooked in decision making. Findings indicate that the ACDI-Corrections Version II juvenile assessment is a valid test that distinguishes between low risk and severe risk juvenile offenders. Moreover, the inclusion of dynamic factors (violence propensity, adjustment to incarceration, and stress management) enhanced the predictive capabilities of recidivism as measured by negative binomial regression. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) and Area Under the Curve (AUC) analyses were conducted to examine accuracy of risk classification in predicting recidivism. These findings add to the existing literature on juvenile offender rates of reoffending, and clinical implications are provided.

The curse of knowledge in estimating jurors' understanding of memory: Attorneys know more about memory than the general population

Malavanti, K. F., Terrell, J. T., Dasse, M. N., & Weaver, III, C. A.

When reasoning about the knowledge of others, we often use our own knowledge as a guide. Sometimes, though, we know significantly more than another person and succumb to the cognitive bias known as the "curse of knowledge:" individuals who know something find it difficult to imagine others not knowing the same information. In fact, we may erroneously conclude that the information we know is "common knowledge." We investigated whether the curse of knowledge may contaminate attorneys' judgments concerning how much jury members know regarding human memory in the context of eyewitness identification. We surveyed 132 attorneys at two different legal conferences, asking them the same questions about memory used by Simons and Chabris (2011). Attorneys' beliefs, while not entirely correct, were considerably more accurate than those of the general population. Those in the legal community should be mindful of this potential curse of knowledge when they evaluate what jurors do and do not know regarding memory and eyewitness evidence.