Perceptions of familiar and unfamiliar ear- and eyewitnesses

Abstract

A witness’s relationship with a defendant is frequently discussed in criminal trials, yet investigations into perceptions of this relationship have been scarce. Further, an exploration of witnesses other than eyewitnesses has been missing from the literature. The present studies explored how witness type and familiarity with a defendant impact the perceived credibility of a witness. In Study 1, a familiar earwitness was perceived as more credible and honest than a stranger earwitness but the same was not found for eyewitnesses. Results from Study 2 suggest an eyewitness was seen as more credible and believable than an earwitness, and that a familiar witness was seen as more reliable than a stranger, but not than an acquaintance. There was no impact of familiarity or witness type on legal decisions. The present studies indicate that the prior definitions of familiarity might only capture a restricted range of potentially familiar relations.

Key words:

• Earwitness
• eyewitness
• familiarity
• perceived credibility
• witness type

Notes

1 An additional 15 participants were randomly selected and excluded to obtain more equal sample sizes across all conditions.

2 One participant identified as non-binary, and one participant identified as gender neutral.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Joseph-Armand Bombardier Canada Graduate Scholarship awarded to the first author, an American Psychology–Law Society Student Grant-in-Aid awarded to the first author, and a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Insight Grant [grant number 435-2014-0916] awarded to the third author. The third author is also supported by the Canada Research Chairs Program.