Eyewitness Memory in Face-to-Face and Immersive Avatar-to-Avatar Contexts

Abstract

Technological advances offer possibilities for innovation in the way eyewitness testimony is elicited. Typically, this occurs face-to-face. We investigated whether a virtual environment, where interviewer and eyewitness communicate as avatars, might confer advantages by attenuating the social and situational demands of a face-to-face interview, releasing more cognitive resources for invoking episodic retrieval mode. In conditions of intentional encoding, eyewitnesses were interviewed 48 h later, either face-to-face or in a virtual environment (N = 38). Participants in the virtual environment significantly outperformed those interviewed face-to-face on all episodic performance measures – improved correct reporting reduced errors, and increased accuracy. Participants reported finding it easier to admit not remembering event information to the avatar, and finding the avatar easier to talk to. These novel findings, and our pattern of retrieval results indicates the potential of avatar-to-avatar communication in virtual environments, and provide impetus for further research investigating eyewitness cognition in contemporary retrieval contexts.

Metacognitive Monitoring and Control of Eyewitness Memory Reports in Autism

“…Witnesses were more accurate in their recall when questions were delivered socially rather than online. This increase in accuracy was not accompanied by a reduction in informativeness, indicating that other processes, such as increased motivation and feelings of accountability, were involved [e.g., McCallum et al, 2016; Vandierendonck & Van Damme, 1988; but see Taylor & Dando, 2018]. That the social condition improved accuracy rates similarly for autistic and TD witnesses is in contrast to the view that autism is marked by diminished social motivation [Chevallier et al, 2012] and is more in line with recent suggestions that autistic people are socially motivated, but that social‐cognitive difficulties can limit their ability to read and respond appropriately to social cues [see e.g., Hull et al, 2017; Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018; Livingston, Shah, & Happé, 2018].…”

“…This tendency is attenuated, however, when they are required to read their responses aloud to the experimenter compared to when their responses are obtained in private [McCallum et al, 2016]. It has been suggested that answering in a social context may motivate TD participants to be more accurate to avoid embarrassment by reporting more accurate CG detail than risk providing inaccurate FG information [McCallum et al, 2016; but see Taylor & Dando, 2018]. Furthermore, McCallum, Brewer, and Weber [2019] argue that witnesses construe informativeness based not only on the degree of specificity in their memories but also on their perceptions of the value or utility of the information.…”

Facing away from the interviewer: Evidence of little benefit to eyewitnesses' memory performance

“…Thus, we could predict that face‐to‐face interaction would be detrimental to witnesses' memory performance during investigative interviews. Whereas research has explored the effectiveness of interviews conducted without a physically‐present interviewer (Gabbert, Hope, & Fisher, 2009; Gawrylowicz, Memon, & Scoboria, 2014; Nash et al, 2014; Taylor & Dando, 2018), in current investigative practice at least one other person would normally be present with the witness during an interview.…”

Social Avatar Theory: From In Vitro to In Vivo (Instagrammer Cognition - Mind the Gap)

“…As the digital world has expanded, multiple avatar subtypes have emerged, each with different, but related characteristics, dependent on avatar purpose such as therapeutic agent [4], and interview facilitation [5]. Of these, the social avatar is considered to be relatively informal, with high levels of user choice and control, a high degree of curation, and a predominantly positive skew (Table 1).…”