Search

Domestic violence typically recurs over time, involving the same victim and perpetrator. When complainants make an allegation about abuse, they are required to particularise the offence and recall details unique to specific occurrences. This experiment investigated adults' ability to particularise an occurrence after experiencing a single or repeated event. Participants watched one or multiple videos of domestic violence and were interviewed about the last or only video they had observed. For repeated-event participants, some details were present in all videos (fixed), whereas others differed predictably (variable). Repeated-event participants recalled a significantly lower proportion of correct details about the target video relative to single event participants, although they reported similar proportions of correct experienced details. Repeated-event participants also reported a significantly higher proportion of correct fixed, relative to correct variable details about the target video. These findings indicate that adults are likely to have difficulty fulfilling the particularisation requirement.

Some forms of abuse, such as domestic violence, tend to occur repeatedly. Although memory for repeated events has received considerable empirical attention, most of this research has used a child sample. Experiments that have examined adult repeated-event memory tend to use vastly different methodological paradigms to that used for children. To investigate whether the same pattern of findings emerge with young adults, we adapted the methodological paradigm used in child repeated-event experiments. In this experiment, 41 undergraduate students experienced one, or multiple similar events. All participants were then interviewed about the same event. Participants who had experienced a single-event were more likely to report correct details than those who had experienced a repeated event. Repeated-event participants were more likely to report general details. These results have implications for the methodological paradigm which is used to examine adult memory for a recurring event.

Recurring forms of abuse like domestic violence are unfortunately common. When an individual makes an allegation about their experience, however, there is rarely additional evidence to corroborate their claim. The veracity of the allegation is thus likely to be a central concern in subsequent proceedings. This experiment explored evaluator's perceptions of adults who were lying, or truthfully recalling a repeated event. In this experiment, participants observed a filmed interview of a speaker recalling an event they had experienced once, or a speaker recalling one instance of an event that they had experienced multiple times. Alternatively, some participants viewed an interview of a speaker who was lying about the event. Repeated-event speakers were perceived as less credible than both single-event speakers and liars. It is important that future research investigates ways to reduce the negative effect that the nature of memory for a repeated event has upon speakers' perceived credibility.

To reduce the memory decay associated with delayed reporting, witnesses are often encouraged to note down their recall immediately after the event. However, research has only investigated the benefits of immediate recall for single events; no research has explored whether immediate recall can improve memory for repeated events. Therefore, this research examined the effect of immediate recall on adult memory for a repeated event. In Experiment 1 (N = 42), participants watched four workplace bullying videos. After each video, the experimental group immediately recalled what occurred during the bullying instance, while the control group did not. One-week after the final video, all participants completed a final recall report about each video in the series. In Experiment 2 (N = 46), the same design and procedure were followed as Experiment 1, except prior to completing their final recall reports, all participants received correct and misleading post-event information about the third instance. The findings revealed that immediate recall enhanced memory accuracy across instances, but did not impact recall of source memory errors nor misinformation acceptance. The findings suggest that it may be beneficial for victims/witnesses of repeated offences, such as domestic abuse, to document their memories soon after experiencing an incident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to capture and preserve eyewitness memory, psychologists have developed cued recall tools that witnesses can fill out immediately after a critical incident. This study assesses the efficacy of a novel tool, 'iWitnessed'. iWitnessed is a smartphone application that elicits information from witnesses about the event using a guided recall procedure. Naïve undergraduate participants (N = 72) witnessed a staged theft and were then randomly allocated to one of three immediate recall conditions: no recall (control), free recall, or iWitnessed. One week later all participants returned to the lab and were interviewed about the theft they had witnessed. The results showed that iWitnessed increased the amount of correct information reported in the participants' immediate accounts (Hedge's g = 1.26) without compromising overall accuracy. However, iWitnessed did not improve delayed recall relative to the free recall and control groups. This research shows that novel technological advancements can be used to capture and preserve accurate and detailed eyewitness accounts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inattentional blindness refers to when people fail to notice obvious and unexpected events when their attention is elsewhere. Existing research suggests that inattentional blindness is a poorly understood concept that violates the beliefs that are commonly held by the public about vision and attention. Given that legal cases may involve individuals who may have experienced inattentional blindness, it is important to understand the beliefs legal populations and members of the community have about inattentional blindness, and their general familiarity and experience with the concept. Australian police officers (n = 94) and lawyers (n = 98), along with psychology students (n = 99) and community members (n = 100) completed a survey where they: a) stated whether an individual would have noticed an event in six legal vignettes, b) rated whether factors would make an individual more, less, or just as likely to notice an unexpected event, c) reported their familiarity with and personal experiences of inattentional blindness, and d) indicated whether they believed individuals could make themselves more likely to notice unexpected events. Respondents in all populations frequently responded "yes" to detecting the unexpected event in most legal vignettes. They also held misconceptions about some factors (expertise and threat) that would influence the noticing of unexpected events. Additionally, personal experiences with inattentional blindness were commonly reported. Finally, respondents provided strategies for what individuals can do to make themselves more likely to notice of unexpected events, despite a lack of evidence to support them. Overall, these findings provide direction for where education and training could be targeted to address misconceptions about inattentional blindness held by legal populations, which may lead to improved decision-making in legal settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]