Fuzzy-Trace Theory,False Memory,and the Law

Abstract

Fuzzy-trace theory (FTT) provides well-researched scientific principles that explain worrisome forms of false memory in the law. False memories are of great legal concern because memory reports are frequently the evidence that determines guilt/innocence and are sometimes the only evidence that crimes have been committed. FTT’s principles reveal errors in commonsense theories that jurors use to judge the credibility of witnesses’ memory reports. This science versus commonsense disconnect is salient in cases involving child witnesses, eyewitness identifications, and confessions. The consequences of this disconnect for justice could be ameliorated by a simple change in federal rules of evidence.

Keywords

false memory fuzzy-trace theory child witness eyewitness confessions

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Armstong

Milles

Possley

(2001, December 16). Coercive and illegal tactics torpedo scores of Cook County murder cases. Chicago Tribune, 1-2.

Arndt

(2012). False recollection: Empirical findings and their theoretical implications. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 56, 81-124.

Bornstein

B. H.

Wiener

R. L.

(Eds.). (2010). Emotion and the law. New York, NY: Springer.

Brained

C. J.

(2013). Murder must memorise. Memory, 21, 547-555.

Brainerd

C. J.

Bookbinder

S. H.

(in press). The semantics of emotion in false memory. Emotion.

Brainerd

C. J.

Reyna

V. F.

(2005). The science of false memory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Brainerd

C. J.

Reyna

V. F.

(2014). Fuzzy-trace theory and lifespan cognitive development. Developmental Review, 38, 89-121.

Brainerd

C. J.

Reyna

V. F.

Estrada

(2006). Recollection rejection of false narrative statements. Memory, 14, 672-691.

Brown

D. A.

(2017, March). Children’s false memories across different paradigms: Staged event vs. DRM list recall. Paper presented at American Psychology and Law Society, Seattle, WA.

10.

Ceci

S. J.

Bruck

(1995). Jeopardy in the courtroom. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

11.

Ceci

S. J.

Friedman

R. D.

(2000). The suggestibility of children: Scientific research and legal implications. Cornell Law Review, 86, 33-108.

12.

Clancy

S. A.

McNally

R. J.

Schacter

D. L.

Lenzenweger

M. F.

Pitman

R. K.

(2002). Memory distortion in people reporting abduction by aliens. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 455-461.

13.

The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives. (2006). Federal rules of evidence. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

14.

Conway

M. A.

Collins

A. F.

Gathercole

S. E.

Anderson

S. J.

(1996). Recollections of true and false autobiographical memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 69-95.

15.

Dewhurst

S. A.

Pursglove

R. C.

Lewis

(2007). Story contexts increase susceptibility to the DRM illusion in 5-year-olds. Developmental Science, 10, 374-378.

16.

Draine

S. C.

Greenwald

A. G.

(1998). Replicable unconscious semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 286-303.

17.

Fisher

A. V.

Sloutsky

V. M.

(2005). When induction meets memory: Evidence for a gradual transition from similarity-based to category-based induction. Child Development, 76, 583-597.

18.

Gudjonsson

G. H.

(2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.

19.

Haber

R. N.

Haber

(2001, November). A meta-analysis of research on eyewitness line-up accuracy. Paper presented at Psychonomic Society, Orlando, FL.

20.

Heaps

C. M.

Nash

(2001). Comparing recollective experience in true and false autobiographical memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 920-930.

21.

Kassin

S. M.

(2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk? American Psychologist, 60, 215-228.

22.

Kintsch

Mangalath

(2011). The construction of meaning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 346-370.

23.

Lampinen

J. M.

Neuschatz

J. S.

Payne

D. G.

(1998). Memory illusions and consciousness: Examining the phenomenology of true and false memories. Current Psychology: Development, Learning, Personality, Social, 16, 181-224.

24.

Lampinen

J. M.

Odegard

T. N.

(2006). Memory editing mechanisms. Memory, 14, 649-654.

25.

Laney

Loftus

E. F.

(2010). Truth in emotional memories. In Bornstein

B. H.

Wiener

R. L.

(Eds.), Emotion and the law (pp. 157-183). New York, NY: Springer.

26.

Loftus

E. F.

Greenspan

R. L.

(2017). If I’m certain, is it true? Accuracy and confidence in eyewitness memory. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18, 1-2.

27.

McAuliff

B. D.

Nicholson

Ravenshanes

(2007, March). Hypothetically speaking: Can expert testimony improve jurors’ understanding of developmental differences in suggestibility? Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston, MA.

28.

McNally

R. J.

(2003). Recovering false memories of trauma: A view from the laboratory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 32-35.

29.

Reyna

V. F.

Brainerd

C. J.

(2011). Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model. Developmental Review, 31, 180-206.

30.

Reyna

V. F.

Corbin

J. C.

Weldon

R. B.

Brainerd

C. J.

(2016). How fuzzy-trace theory predicts true and false memories for words, sentences, and narratives. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5, 1-9.

31.

Saks

M. J.

(2018). Eyewitness identification errors. Monitor on Psychology, 49(4), 7.

32.

Singer

Spear

(2015). Phantom Recollection of bridging and elaborative inferences. Discourse Processes, 52, 356-375.

33.

State of California v. Buckey. (1990). Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California.

34.

State of New Jersey v. Gil. (2017). Superior Court, Hudson County, New Jersey.

35.

State of New Jersey v. Michaels. (1994). 136N.J., 299, 642, A2d 1372, New Jersey.

36.

Wells

G. L.

Small

Penrod

Malpass

R. S.

Fulero

S. M.

Brimacombe

C. A. E.

(1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 603-648.

37.

Wilson

B. M.

Seale-Carlisle

T. M.

Mickes

(2018). The effects of verbal descriptions on performance in lineups and showups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 113-124.

38.

Wixted

J. T.

Wells

G. L.

(2017). The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: A new synthesis. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18, 10-65