Language can be viewed as a complex set of cues that shape people's mental representations of situations. For example, people think of behavior described using imperfective aspect (i.e., what a person was doing) as a dynamic, unfolding sequence of actions, whereas the same behavior described using perfective aspect (i.e., what a person did) is perceived as a completed whole. A recent study found that aspect can also influence how we think about a person's intentions (Hart & Albarracín, 2011). Participants judged actions described in imperfective as being more intentional (d between 0.67 and 0.77) and they imagined these actions in more detail (d = 0.73). The fact that this finding has implications for legal decision making, coupled with the absence of other direct replication attempts, motivated this registered replication report (RRR). Multiple laboratories carried out 12 direct replication studies, including one MTurk study. A meta-analysis of these studies provides a precise estimate of the size of this effect free from publication bias. This RRR did not find that grammatical aspect affects intentionality (d between 0 and −0.24) or imagery (d = −0.08). We discuss possible explanations for the discrepancy between these results and those of the original study.

The current manuscript proposes a theory of how witnesses assess their confidence following a lineup identification, called the selective cue integration framework (SCIF). Drawing from past research on the postidentification feedback effect, the SCIF details a three-stage process of confidence assessment that is based largely on a conceptualization of feedback-produced confidence inflation as an attitude change phenomenon. According to the SCIF, when asked to assess their confidence, witnesses assess the strength of their internal accuracy cues (assessment stage). If weak, witnesses look specifically for external accuracy cues that can justify their identification decision (search stage). Finally, these justifying external cues are submitted to a credibility check (evaluation stage); if no credibility-undermining information is uncovered, they become integrated into one's confidence assessment. Three studies used college students as mock-witnesses to test predictions derived from the SCIF. In study 1a, lineup identification confidence was unaffected by disconfirming feedback unless that statement recanted previously administered confirming feedback, suggesting the existence of different stages in the confidence assessment process. Study 1b demonstrated that the effects of recanted feedback depend only on a discrediting of the feedback itself, and not on the discrediting of the identification. Study 2 demonstrated the generality of the SCIF by showing its predictive ability within a novel and methodologically improved postidentification cowitness feedback paradigm. Results across all three studies supported the SCIF as a theoretical framework for witness confidence assessment, suggest a new means of eliminating the feedback effect, and unite postidentification feedback and cowitness phenomena under a common theoretical umbrella.

Confessions represent one of the most influential types of evidence, and research has shown that mock jurors often fail to dismiss unreliable confession evidence. However, recent studies suggest that jurors might believe in the false confession phenomenon more than they once did. One possible reason for this could be increased publicity regarding false confession cases. To assess this possibility, we administered an extensive online survey to a sample of potential jurors in the United States from 11 universities and Amazon Mechanical Turk. Perceptions of confession behaviors (as related to others and oneself), Miranda waivers, interrogation methods, dispositional risk factors, and confession admissibility and evidentiary weight were assessed, in addition to respondents' self-reported crime-media activity and familiarity with disputed confession cases. Respondents' perceptions were generally consistent with empirical research findings. Respondents believed suspects do not understand their Miranda rights; gauged interrogation tactics usage relatively accurately; viewed psychologically coercive tactics as coercive and more likely to result in false, rather than true, confessions; and recognized that confessions elicited via coercive measures should be inadmissible as evidence in court. However, respondents' perceptions did not align with research on interrogation length, and respondents did not fully appreciate the risk youth poses in interrogations. Moreover, being familiar with disputed confession cases resulted in more negative views of interrogations and confessions. Overall, potential jurors are seemingly more cognizant of false confessions and the tactics that elicit them than in the past, and evidence suggests that media outlets can be used to promote interrogation and confession knowledge.

Although jurisdictions have attempted to improve their response procedures, sexual assault cases are often insufficiently investigated. This study examines the survey responses of 460 female sexual assault survivors regarding their experiences with response personnel. Overall satisfaction with response services was 66.1%. Victim advocates and forensic nurses received higher satisfaction ratings than did patrol officers, detectives, and State’s Attorney’s Office staff. The present study also found that 65% of the variance in overall satisfaction was accounted for by four personnel behaviors: respectful treatment, clearly explained procedures, believed their stories, and demonstrated cultural sensitivity. Policy implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Facial composite research has generally focused on the investigative utility of composites-using composites to find suspects. However, almost no work has examined the diagnostic utility of facial composites-the extent to which composites can be used as evidence against a suspect. For example, detectives and jurors may use the perceived similarity of a suspect to a composite as evidence to determine the likelihood of a suspect's guilt. However, research in social cognition and models of cognitive coherence suggest that these similarity judgments may be biased by evaluators' preexisting beliefs of guilt. Two studies examined how preexisting beliefs of guilt influence similarity ratings between a suspect and a facial composite. Study 1 (n = 93) demonstrated that mock-investigators' beliefs in a suspect's guilt inflated their subsequent similarity ratings. Study 2 (n = 49) demonstrated that mock-jurors' beliefs in a defendant's guilt predicted their similarity ratings. These findings highlight a problem of using facial composites as evidence against a suspect, and demonstrate the malleability of similarity judgments.