Predicting Accuracy in Eyewitness Testimonies with Memory Retrieval Effort and Confidence

Although some researchers in the broad field of academic psychology have come to feel that eyewitness memory is more trustworthy than previously thought, the general consensus is that eyewitness recall is faulty. There is a plethora of evidence to support the notion that eyewitness recall is fundamentally faulty. Memory is flexible, according to research, and eyewitnesses misidentifications are believed to have played a significant role in the majority of Exonerations of an innocent. The great majority of eyewitness accuracy research has focused on assessing and improving eyewitness identification accuracy, or the ability of a witness to properly name a culprit from a collection of foils and suspects. The research of eyewitness memory employs a variety of techniques, such as the clinical approach, the interview method, and the simulation method, among others. Many of the reasons discussed above contribute to the distortions and mistakes in eyewitness recall. Age, sex, mood, assurance, suggestibility, witness intelligence, and other characteristics all play a role in EWT. The link between eyewitness credibility and accuracy has been the subject of numerous investigations. In terms of common sense, it is assumed that there is a substantial positive association between eyewitnesses’ confidence and accuracy. However, several research has revealed either no association or a slight positive correlation between the two variables, contradicting this idea. The correlation between trust and accuracy was nearly negligible in one study, with an average correlation of 0.07. The effect of emotion on recall accuracy seen events has been examined in various experimental investigations by showing an emotional or impartial experience through slides. The experienced events in real-life settings are very emotive, which is difficult to replicate in the laboratory.