Attribution of crime motives biases eyewitnesses’ memory and sentencing decisions. / Hellmann, Deborah; Memon, Amina.

In: Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 22, No. 10, 30.06.2016, p. 957-976 .

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

E-pub ahead of print

Standard

Attribution of crime motives biases eyewitnesses’ memory and sentencing decisions. / Hellmann, Deborah; Memon, Amina.

In: Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 22, No. 10, 30.06.2016, p. 957-976 .

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Hellmann, Deborah ; Memon, Amina. / Attribution of crime motives biases eyewitnesses’ memory and sentencing decisions. In: Psychology, Crime and Law. 2016 ; Vol. 22, No. 10. pp. 957-976 .

BibTeX

@article{b94b7d77ef89486e9ee8465fd3836f07,
title = "Attribution of crime motives biases eyewitnesses{\textquoteright} memory and sentencing decisions",
abstract = "In court, the basic expectation is that eyewitness accounts are solely based on what the witness saw. Research on post-event influences has shown that this is not always the case and memory distortions are quite common. However, potential effects of an eyewitness{\textquoteright} attributions regarding a perpetrator{\textquoteright}s crime motives have been widely neglected in this domain. In this paper, we present two experiments (N = 209) in which eyewitnesses were led to conclude that a perpetrator{\textquoteright}s motives for a crime were either dispositional or situational. As expected, misinformation consistent with an eyewitness{\textquoteright} attribution of crime motives was typically falsely recognised as true whereas inconsistent misinformation was correctly rejected. Furthermore, a dispositional vs. situational attribution of crime motives resulted in more severe (mock) sentencing supporting previous research. The findings are discussed in the context of schema-consistent biases and the effect of attributions about character in a legal setting.",
author = "Deborah Hellmann and Amina Memon",
year = "2016",
month = jun,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1080/1068316X.2016.1207768",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "957--976 ",
journal = "Psychology, Crime and Law",
issn = "1068-316X",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Attribution of crime motives biases eyewitnesses’ memory and sentencing decisions

AU - Hellmann, Deborah

AU - Memon, Amina

PY - 2016/6/30

Y1 - 2016/6/30

N2 - In court, the basic expectation is that eyewitness accounts are solely based on what the witness saw. Research on post-event influences has shown that this is not always the case and memory distortions are quite common. However, potential effects of an eyewitness’ attributions regarding a perpetrator’s crime motives have been widely neglected in this domain. In this paper, we present two experiments (N = 209) in which eyewitnesses were led to conclude that a perpetrator’s motives for a crime were either dispositional or situational. As expected, misinformation consistent with an eyewitness’ attribution of crime motives was typically falsely recognised as true whereas inconsistent misinformation was correctly rejected. Furthermore, a dispositional vs. situational attribution of crime motives resulted in more severe (mock) sentencing supporting previous research. The findings are discussed in the context of schema-consistent biases and the effect of attributions about character in a legal setting.

AB - In court, the basic expectation is that eyewitness accounts are solely based on what the witness saw. Research on post-event influences has shown that this is not always the case and memory distortions are quite common. However, potential effects of an eyewitness’ attributions regarding a perpetrator’s crime motives have been widely neglected in this domain. In this paper, we present two experiments (N = 209) in which eyewitnesses were led to conclude that a perpetrator’s motives for a crime were either dispositional or situational. As expected, misinformation consistent with an eyewitness’ attribution of crime motives was typically falsely recognised as true whereas inconsistent misinformation was correctly rejected. Furthermore, a dispositional vs. situational attribution of crime motives resulted in more severe (mock) sentencing supporting previous research. The findings are discussed in the context of schema-consistent biases and the effect of attributions about character in a legal setting.

U2 - 10.1080/1068316X.2016.1207768

DO - 10.1080/1068316X.2016.1207768

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 957

EP - 976

JO - Psychology, Crime and Law

JF - Psychology, Crime and Law

SN - 1068-316X

IS - 10

ER -