Narrative and Spatial Memory for Jury Viewings in a Reconstructed Virtual Environment

Abstract

This paper showcases one way of how virtual reconstruction can be used in a courtroom. The results of a pilot study on narrative and spatial memory are presented in the context of viewing real and virtual copies of a simulated crime scene. Based on current court procedures, three different viewing options were compared: photographs, a real life visit, and a 3D virtual reconstruction of the scene viewed in a Virtual Reality headset. Participants were also given a written narrative that included the spatial locations of stolen goods and were measured on their ability to recall and understand these spatial relationships of those stolen items. The results suggest that Virtual Reality is more reliable for spatial memory compared to photographs and that Virtual Reality provides a compromise for when physical viewing of crime scenes are not possible. We conclude that Virtual Reality is a promising medium for the court.

Using virtual reality to understand context-dependent spatial memory

“…and virtually (i.e., VR room condition) reinstated environments, performance in the latter condition was perpetually lower than that in the former. This pattern of results is congruous with findings from studies comparing spatial memory in real and virtual environments (e.g., Lamers & Lanen, 2021;Reichherzer et al, 2018). Seeing that both real and virtual reinstatements produced significantly better spatial memory in comparison to a different or partially reinstated environment, it can be concluded that remembering locations in a virtual replica of the encoding environment may be effective, but not as efficacious as remembering in the actual encoding environment.…”

Examination of fire scene reconstructions using virtual reality to enhance forensic decision-making. A case study in Scotland.

“…Immersion is an essential factor in the sensory fidelity of virtual environment visualisation and plays a significant role in creating a solid sense of 'presence' in the virtual space (Darken et al 2014). Such attributes have demonstrated an enhancement in environmental perception and spatial memory (Reichherzer et al 2018;Ruddle et al 2011;Reichherzer et al 2021), as well as retention of memories (Mania et al 2003). The scientific literature shows that Virtual Reality (VR) is not new to forensic science.…”

Evaluating Mixed and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Literature Review (2009-2019)

“…We found that 21% of user studies (53/248) assessed the usability of MR/AR approaches. These studies often focused on design/human factors (14/53) and involved methods such as: (a) The Slater-Usoh-Steed Questionnaire (SUS) [16,23,99] , (b) Mixed Reality Experience Questionnaire (MREQ) [97], and (c) Post Experience Questionnaire (PEQ) [97] .…”

“…Studies that examined memory ensured first that participants in an evaluation had a normal memory ability. To this end, they used the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics (ANAM) survey [99]. Other general methods for collecting data on the recollection of participants in evaluations of MR/AR were: (a) Free Recall, in which participants were asked to tell a narrative from their recollection; (b) Cued Recall, in which participants were asked questions to drive their recollection in order to recognize relevant points that were missing in their narrative.…”

“…Other general methods for collecting data on the recollection of participants in evaluations of MR/AR were: (a) Free Recall, in which participants were asked to tell a narrative from their recollection; (b) Cued Recall, in which participants were asked questions to drive their recollection in order to recognize relevant points that were missing in their narrative. Since the confidence of participants in their recollection varied sometimes, researchers complemented the analysis with measures of participants' level of confidence using the Awareness State score [25,99].…”