Periodic Reporting for period 3 - WEIRD WITNESSES (Beyond WEIRD Witnesses: Eyewitness Memory in Cross-Cultural Contexts)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2022-08-01 al 2024-01-31
Our increasingly international society demands that eyewitnesses of serious crimes regularly provide testimony in cross-cultural settings, such as international criminal tribunals. This poses significant challenges for investigators and legal decision-makers. Errors in fact-finding may result in wrongful convictions and unjust acquittals. Yet, eyewitness memory research has predominantly focused on Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) witnesses.
The Beyond WEIRD Witnesses project assesses how culture-dependent variables, such as source attribution and reporting style, influence eyewitness memory. The project addresses two key objectives: (1) develop culturally modulated theory of eyewitness memory and (2) design and test evidence-based interview guidelines.
Subproject 1 examines what happens when police investigators interview eyewitnesses from a different cultural background. It involves the systematic coding of culture-dependent variables in video-recorded police interviews with witnesses of serious crimes in South Africa, a society with many different subcultures. In Subproject 2, we analyse the frequency, nature and legal consequences of culture-dependent variables in international criminal cases. It involves an empirical document analysis of eyewitness evidence provided at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and interviews with international legal scholars and practitioners. In Subproject 3, we assess how different cultural groups encode, store and retrieve memories, and how memory reports are evaluated in immigration contexts. It involves a series of experiments in which the objective and perceived characteristics of statements provided by witnesses originating from Sub-Saharan Africa are compared to a matched Western control group.
The project integrates analyses of video, document and experimental data to provide insight into culture-dependent variables in eyewitness memory. The new theory will enable researchers to steer away from the present WEIRD bias in legal psychology. The interview guidelines will help investigators obtain better information from witnesses.
The Beyond WEIRD Witnesses project assesses how culture-dependent variables, such as source attribution and reporting style, influence eyewitness memory. The project addresses two key objectives: (1) develop culturally modulated theory of eyewitness memory and (2) design and test evidence-based interview guidelines.
Subproject 1 examines what happens when police investigators interview eyewitnesses from a different cultural background. It involves the systematic coding of culture-dependent variables in video-recorded police interviews with witnesses of serious crimes in South Africa, a society with many different subcultures. In Subproject 2, we analyse the frequency, nature and legal consequences of culture-dependent variables in international criminal cases. It involves an empirical document analysis of eyewitness evidence provided at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and interviews with international legal scholars and practitioners. In Subproject 3, we assess how different cultural groups encode, store and retrieve memories, and how memory reports are evaluated in immigration contexts. It involves a series of experiments in which the objective and perceived characteristics of statements provided by witnesses originating from Sub-Saharan Africa are compared to a matched Western control group.
The project integrates analyses of video, document and experimental data to provide insight into culture-dependent variables in eyewitness memory. The new theory will enable researchers to steer away from the present WEIRD bias in legal psychology. The interview guidelines will help investigators obtain better information from witnesses.
In Subproject 1, a focus group with 12 international academic experts and South African cultural informants was organized to identify cultural factors for eyewitness interviews. The insights from this focus group and a critical literature review informed a framework of culture-dependent and intercultural communication factors in cross-cultural interviews. We submitted a scientific article on this framework to an international, peer-reviewed journal. The framework also served as a basis for the qualitative coding of 100 video-recorded eyewitness interviews conducted by the South African Police Services. Approximately 60% of the interviews have been discussed and coded and we have started writing two articles, one on cultural differences in eyewitness testimony and one on cross-cultural communication issues.
In Subproject 2, an inter-disciplinary expert panel was organized, bringing together experts in the field of international law, legal psychology, anthropology, clinical psychology, to discuss common cultural challenges that arise during trials in international criminal tribunals. Their insightful discussions resulted in a list of possible culture-dependent variables that may influence different parts of trial proceedings. Using the outcomes from the expert panel as well as an in-depth literature search, a coding scheme of culture-dependent variables and their relevant definitions was created. This coding scheme formed the basis for a thematic analysis of 64 transcripts from the ICTR. This analysis is still ongoing. In addition, we are conducting a scoping review of the relevant literature to identify how culture influences testimony.
In Subproject 3, we first studied relevant literature to inform the design of our first experiment, which assesses cultural differences in eyewitness memory. We then developed research materials and pilot-tested them. We submitted the experimental protocol, materials, and a COVID-19 protocol to the ethical committee of the faculty and revised the experiment based on their advice. When it became clear that face-to-face interviews were not feasible, we changed the experimental protocol to an online version, which we used to pilot-test the experiment. After new developments in the pandemic, it was feasible again to conduct the interviews face-to-face. We then reached out and pitched the research to over 35 organizations to recruit Sub-Saharan African participants. We are currently in the process of conducting interviews.
In Subproject 2, an inter-disciplinary expert panel was organized, bringing together experts in the field of international law, legal psychology, anthropology, clinical psychology, to discuss common cultural challenges that arise during trials in international criminal tribunals. Their insightful discussions resulted in a list of possible culture-dependent variables that may influence different parts of trial proceedings. Using the outcomes from the expert panel as well as an in-depth literature search, a coding scheme of culture-dependent variables and their relevant definitions was created. This coding scheme formed the basis for a thematic analysis of 64 transcripts from the ICTR. This analysis is still ongoing. In addition, we are conducting a scoping review of the relevant literature to identify how culture influences testimony.
In Subproject 3, we first studied relevant literature to inform the design of our first experiment, which assesses cultural differences in eyewitness memory. We then developed research materials and pilot-tested them. We submitted the experimental protocol, materials, and a COVID-19 protocol to the ethical committee of the faculty and revised the experiment based on their advice. When it became clear that face-to-face interviews were not feasible, we changed the experimental protocol to an online version, which we used to pilot-test the experiment. After new developments in the pandemic, it was feasible again to conduct the interviews face-to-face. We then reached out and pitched the research to over 35 organizations to recruit Sub-Saharan African participants. We are currently in the process of conducting interviews.
One of the most important breakthroughs beyond the state of the art is the realization that there is a lot of disagreement and unclarity surrounding the term ‘culture’ in scientific research. This emerged during both expert panels, where it became clear that experts disagreed amongst themselves what ‘culture’ entails. Further, the scoping review in Subproject 2 revealed that the vast majority of journal articles that discuss culture and witness accounts fail to define the term ‘culture.’ This leaves the reader to make their own assumptions, which may or may not match the assumptions and intentions of the researcher. In our publications, we will draw attention to this problem in the existing literature and hope to challenge other researchers to think more deeply about what they mean by “culture” and communicate that more clearly to their audiences.
We also progressed beyond the state of the art in our development of research protocols in each of the subprojects. In Subproject 1, based on insights from the expert panel, we decided to have each South African police interview coded by one “outsider” coder (from outside South Africa) and one “insider” coder (from South Africa), to ensure that we obtain the most comprehensive picture of cultural differences and cross-cultural communication issues. In Subproject 2, we decided to use a novel methodology to analyze the relevant literature: a scoping review, which allows the researcher to map the literature with a broader scope than a systematic review. In Subproject 3, we reconsidered the use of a co-witness report to avoid the risk of negating cultural differences in reporting and we decided to use a test to gauge the degree of collectivism in the participant’s background that is less reliant on the participant’s language proficiency.
The expected results until the end of the project are the completion of coding of the South African police interviews (Subproject 1), the completion of coding of ICTR documents and an ongoing ICC case, of the scoping review and of semi-structured interviews with relevant practitioners (Subproject 2) and the completion of three experiments on cultural differences in eyewitness memory and the evaluation thereof (Subproject 3). We plan to publish multiple articles on our findings to date and our findings to come.
We also progressed beyond the state of the art in our development of research protocols in each of the subprojects. In Subproject 1, based on insights from the expert panel, we decided to have each South African police interview coded by one “outsider” coder (from outside South Africa) and one “insider” coder (from South Africa), to ensure that we obtain the most comprehensive picture of cultural differences and cross-cultural communication issues. In Subproject 2, we decided to use a novel methodology to analyze the relevant literature: a scoping review, which allows the researcher to map the literature with a broader scope than a systematic review. In Subproject 3, we reconsidered the use of a co-witness report to avoid the risk of negating cultural differences in reporting and we decided to use a test to gauge the degree of collectivism in the participant’s background that is less reliant on the participant’s language proficiency.
The expected results until the end of the project are the completion of coding of the South African police interviews (Subproject 1), the completion of coding of ICTR documents and an ongoing ICC case, of the scoping review and of semi-structured interviews with relevant practitioners (Subproject 2) and the completion of three experiments on cultural differences in eyewitness memory and the evaluation thereof (Subproject 3). We plan to publish multiple articles on our findings to date and our findings to come.