2003Journal of Applied Social PsychologyRequires access

Effects of the Inclusion and Refutation of Peripheral Details on Eyewitness Credibility

Jeffrey J. Borckardt, Erik Sprohge, Michael R. Nash

Open publisher page 23 citations

Abstract

The present study examines the effects of including trivial details in eyewitness testimony on witness credibility, as well as the effects of discrediting presented details. Participants (N= 155) read 2 brief, contradictory depositions from fictional witnesses about a fictional car accident. One of the depositions included a short set of details unrelated to the accident itself. After participants rated the credibility of the witnesses, the trivial details were refuted and the participants rated the credibility of the witnesses again. Contrary to previous research (Bell & Loftus, 1989), the inclusion of trivial details had no effect on witness credibility. However, significant effects on witness credibility were obtained when the details were refuted. As expected, the credibility of the witness presenting the trivial details significantly decreased after detail refutation. More interestingly, refutation appeared to increase the credibility of the other witness.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The present study examines the effects of including trivial details in eyewitness testimony on witness credibility, as well as the effects of discrediting presented details. Participants (N= 155) read 2 brief, contradictory depositions from fictional witnesses about a fictional car accident. One of the depositions included a short set of details unrelated to the accident itself. After participants rated the credibility of the witnesses, the trivial details were refuted and the participants rated the credibility of the witnesses again. Contrary to previous research (Bell & Loftus, 1989), the inclusion of trivial details had no effect on witness credibility. However, significant effects on witness credibility were obtained when the details were refuted. As expected, the credibility of the witness presenting the trivial details significantly decreased after detail refutation. More interestingly, refutation appeared to increase the credibility of the other witness.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 23 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The present study examines the effects of including trivial details in eyewitness testimony on witness credibility, as well as the effects of discrediting presented details. Participants (N= 155) read 2 brief, contradictory depositions from fictional witnesses about a fictional car accident. One of the depositions included a short set of details unrelated to the accident itself. After participants rated the credibility of the witnesses, the trivial details were refuted and the participants rated the credibility of the witnesses again. Contrary to previous research (Bell & Loftus, 1989), the inclusion of trivial details had no effect on witness credibility. However, significant effects on witness credibility were obtained when the details were refuted. As expected, the credibility of the witness presenting the trivial details significantly decreased after detail refutation. More interestingly, refutation appeared to increase the credibility of the other witness.

Key concepts: Credibility, Witness, Psychology, Eyewitness testimony, Accident (philosophy), Social psychology, Inclusion (mineral), Source credibility

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Effects of the Inclusion and Refutation of Peripheral Details on Eyewitness Credibility — Research Paper | ScholarLens