Author:
,Pedersen Frida Sylthe,Hansen Anita Lill,Sandvik Asle
Abstract
To minimise errors linked to witness statements in criminal cases, it is crucial that justice system participants possess knowledge about the factors affecting eyewitness reliability. Previous research has explored the understanding of eyewitness factors among Norwegian judges, psychologists, jury members and civilians. However, no studies have examined such knowledge among police professionals, who are responsible for collecting and safeguarding evidence obtained from witnesses. Therefore, this study aims to examine the extent of knowledge about eyewitness factors among Norwegian police students. A group of 54 police students from the Norwegian Police University College in Stavern and Bodø completed an electronic questionnaire containing statements related to various eyewitness factors. The results showed that, on average, the police students accurately responded to 80.7% of the statements. This level of knowledge is higher than that observed among judges, psychologists and jury members in Norway and among police officers in other countries. Additionally, third-year students demonstrated a higher level of knowledge compared to their first-year counterparts, which could suggest that the educational curriculum offered at the Norwegian Police University College is effective in enhancing knowledge levels. The study has some limitations, however, and the results should be interpreted with caution until further research is conducted. Keywords: police education, eyewitness psychology, eyewitness testimony, legal safeguards, reliability
Reference34 articles.
1. Benton, T. R., Ross, D. F., Bradshaw, E., Thomas, W. N. & Bradshaw, G. S. (2006). Eyewitness memory is still not common sense: Comparing jurors, judges and law enforcement to eyewitness experts. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 20(1), 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1171
2. Bjørndal, L. D., McGill, L., Magnussen, S., Richardson, S., Saraiva, R., Stadel, M. & Brennen, T. (2021). Norwegian judges' knowledge of factors affecting eyewitness testimony: a 12-year follow-up. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 28(5), 665-682. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1837028
3. Dobolyi, D. G. & Dodson, C. S. (2013). Eyewitness confidence in simultaneous and sequential lineups: A criterion shift account for sequential mistaken identification overconfidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(4), 345-357. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034596
4. Fraser, I., Waite, K. & Bond-Fraser, L. (2013). Canadian police officers' knowledge of the fallibility of eyewitness testimony. International Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Science, 1(3), 108-118.
5. Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L. A. & Hartwig, M. (2005). Eyewitness testimony: Tracing the beliefs of Swedish legal professionals. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 23(5), 709-727. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.670