Citation

Kerstholt JH, Jackson JL. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 1998; 12(5): 445-454.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1998, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199810)12:5<445::AID-ACP518>3.0.CO;2-8

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to investigate both the effect of the order of presentation of defence and prosecution evidence and the prior availability of background information on assessment of guilt. Subjects were required to judge the defendant's probability of guilt either after each witness statement (step-by-step) or after having read all witness statements (end-of-sequence). In the step-by-step mode, an order effect was observed with later evidence exerting a greater impact on the subjects' judgment. This recency effect probably occurred because subjects used an anchoring-and-adjustment process: each new piece of evidence was averaged with an anchor judgment reflecting the overall assessment of previous items. In the end-of-sequence mode, on the other hand, the order effect depended on the background condition: if background information was provided a recency effect occurred, but if no background information was available a primacy effect was evident. This result might be explained by assuming that subjects tried to integrate witness information into a coherent cognitive pattern. As the judgment is memory-based in the end-of-sequence condition, recent information will be more available than earlier items. However, when no background information was presented, the first evidence items had to be processed at a more semantic, deeper level, resulting in a primacy effect that apparently outweighed the recency effect. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Language: en