Remembrance of Eyewitness Testimony: Effects of Emotional Content, Self‐Relevance, and Emotional Tone¹

Abstract

This experiment concerned the effects of emotional content, self‐relevance, and emotional tone of testimony on memory. Eyewitness accounts of 4 events were constructed that systematically differed in emotionality and self‐relevance. The testimony, captured on videotape, was expressed with or without negative emotion. After viewing one of the videotaped accounts, participants were administered cued‐recall and recognition memory tests. Significant main effects indicated that participants best remembered testimony that was emotional in content, self‐relevant, and negatively expressed. Although emotional content and self‐relevance interacted to affect state anxiety, the latter did not mediate memory effects. Overall, significant gender differences in state anxiety but not memory emerged. Implications for understanding the influence of emotion on juror memory are discussed.

Supporting children in U.S. legal proceedings: Descriptive and attitudinal data from a national survey of victim/witness assistants.

“…Thus, it is possible that using innovative procedures with children, although effective at reducing stress, may undermine their credibility at trial. Recent research also suggests that the emotional tone of a victim’s testimony may affect jurors’ ability to remember that testimony (Block, Greenberg, & Goodman, 2009). Participants were better able to remember a victim’s testimony when it was conveyed using a fearful, emotional tone than when these features were absent.…”

Hippocampal activity is associated with self‐descriptiveness effect in memory, whereas self‐reference effect in memory depends on medial prefrontal activity

“…Consistently, pervious studies where directly referring the self was not a part of task demands demonstrated the superiority of self‐relevant information both at behavioral and neural level. At the behavioral level, highly self‐relevant information exhibited better recognition (Cunningham et al,2008) and more precise eyewitness testimony memory (Block et al,2009). At neural level, passively viewing self‐relevant information activated massive medial prefrontal regions relative to self‐irrelevant information (Moran et al,2009).…”

Trials and Tribulations: Psychopathic Traits, Emotion, and Decision-Making in an Ambiguous Case of Sexual Assault

“…Not only does emotional tone and content influence memory for testimony (Block et al, 2009), but credibility of victims varies as a function of emotional expression (Kaufman et al, 2003;Wessel et al, 2006). In general, research has reported that victims who display emotions (relative to appearing non-emotional) are often seen as more credible and not responsible for being victimized (e.g., Bollingmo, Wessel, Eilertsen, & Magnussen, 2008;Kaufmann et al, 2003).…”

“…One such factor under investigation in the present study is the emotionality of a claim and whether this influences witness credibility. Past research has suggested that expressed emotion and emotional displays are highly relevant to consider in judicial decision-making (e.g., Block, Greenberg, & Goodman, 2009;Kaufmann, Drevland, Wessel, Overskeid, & Magnussen, 2003;Wessel, Drevland, Eilertsen, & Magnussen, 2006). Given this relationship, consideration of juror factors that may affect the interpretation of emotionality, such as the manner in which persons process information (i.e., rational versus emotional; Epstein, 2003) or the degree to which they have emotional processing deficiencies (i.e., psychopathy; Dutton, 2012) also is critical.…”