Data collected for "Providing an Eyewitness Testimony as an Individual who Stammers: Examining Accuracy/Completeness and Subjective Experiences"

Abstract

Stammering may impede an individual's eyewitness testimony and reduce jurors' perceptions of their credibility through a complex interplay of bio-psycho-social factors. However, no research to date has explored this. Three co-produced, mixed-methods studies are reported, investigating the evidential quality, lived experiences and perceived credibility of people who stammer (PWS) as witnesses. In pre-registered Study 1, PWS recalled as much correct information as non-stammering witnesses overall. However, during the free – but not cued – recall interview phase, PWS provided fewer correct details. A reflexive thematic analysis of participants' post-testimony reflections captured how PWS experienced a cyclical relationship between communicative pressure, anxiety over listener misperceptions and stammer severity, which they navigated either by employing avoidance strategies at the expense of testimony or by speaking through their stammer. In pre-registered Study 2, mock jurors rated PWS as less confident yet more likeable and trustworthy than non-stammering witnesses. In Study 3, providing jurors with information about stammering further improved their likeability and trustworthiness but had no impact on perceived confidence. Findings provide new insight into communication disorders in legal contexts – and the unique challenges faced by PWS in particular – demonstrating the need for systemic accommodations and targeted training for legal professionals. This dataset contains * A SAV file with participant demographics, cognitive ability scores, and the data on completeness, errors, and accuracy of participants' testimony accounts in overall, free, and cued recall phases. * Another SAV file containing the number of correct details and errors, and accuracy (%) of 12 testimony accounts (6 accounts from each group) coded by two independent raters for inter-rater reliability. * Transcripts (docx) of the semi-structured interviews conducted in Study 1b. * The post-testimony survey responses (pdf) provided by participants who stammer.The primary aim of the first part of this study is to examine the accuracy and completeness of accounts in eyewitness testimony setting between people who stammer and those who do not. Therefore, there will be one between-subject factor (people who stammer vs. Do not stammer). Participants will engage in the same research procedure for the first part of the study: first they will watch a video of a mock crime before being interviewed for their memory of it using standard eyewitness interviewing procedure: first prompting their free recall of the event, before being asked questions based on what they freely recalled. The main planned analysis will examine group effects on recall of details across the interview as a whole (i.e., free and cued recall combined). Further exploratory analyses will examine whether there are group differences in the recall of correct details, errors, and accuracy in eyewitness testimony accounts within free and cued recall (respectively). The second part of this study will use a mixed methods approach using an online survey, consisting of both Likert scale questions and open-ended text-based questions. This approach will primarily involve an exploratory qualitative approach to the analysis of participants’ written responses. Quantitative (Likert scale) data will also be reported