Citation

Read JD, Desmarais SL. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2009; 23(3): 301-326.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/acp.1459

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Lay opinions concerning eyewitness topics were surveyed in three community samples of juror-eligible participants in Canada. The scientific reliability of these topics had been previously evaluated by eyewitness experts. The first survey assessed participant responses to the identically worded expert items. Participants responded to many statements with greater accuracy than anticipated. Two subsequent surveys assessed the consistency of lay knowledge across variations in the directionality and wording of items and the provision of additional contextual information. Taken together, jury-eligible participants frequently responded to survey items in ways that closely resembled the responses of experts and suggested awareness and understanding of these topics at levels beyond those previously obtained. Further, the provision of contextual information increased response accuracy and reduced the frequencies of ‘Don't Know’ responses. Deficiencies in knowledge for 50% of the topics were also apparent; however, these topics were frequently those for which the experts themselves had not reached consensus. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.