Science-Based Recommendations for the Collection of Eyewitness Identification Evidence

For almost 70% of the wrongfully convicted defendants who have been exonerated by new DNA evidence, one or more mistaken eyewitness identifications played a role in their wrongful convictions.1 In recognition of the significant role that mistaken identifications play in miscarriages of justice, social scientists have spent the last 40 years studying which police practices can be improved to increase the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence, including instructions to witnesses,2 selecting fillers (i.e., known innocent persons) for lineups or photo arrays who do not cause the suspect to stand out,3 and eliminating possible feedback from administrators who know which lineup member is the suspect.4 Based on this body of research, the American Psychology-Law Society (AP-LS)5 commissioned a panel of eyewitness scholars to review the extant literature and make evidence-based recommendations about the best police practice for enhancing the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence.

From Whose Perspective? Differences between Actors and Observers in Determining the Voluntariness of Guilty Pleas

Most criminal cases are adjudicated by guilty pleas. The Supreme Court has held that guilty pleas must be made voluntarily (Brady v. United States, 1970). Although most defendants report that their pleas are voluntary, many also report that they did not feel a part of the decision-making process and were not ultimately responsible for the decision (Redlich & Summers, 2012). This project will examine how different legal actors (i.e., defendants, judges) perceive the voluntariness of a plea decision by drawing on social psychological theories including the actor/observer bias and procedural justice

Death Qualification May Not Increase Convictions Despite Increasing Pretrial Presumption of Guilt

We provide all data and stimulus materials related to the research article entitled “Death Qualification May Not Increase Convictions Despite Increasing Pretrial Presumption of Guilt". We made publicly available the trial and voir dire transcripts and videos, and data/syntax for both study 1 and 2