Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)



Document Type



Post-identification feedback (PIF) occurs when witnesses are given feedback following their identification choices. This feedback has been shown to alter witnesses’ retrospective judgments regarding their witnessing experience (e.g., they are more confident that they made a correct identification). PIF effects are robust; they impact witnesses’ memory of their experience, and also appear to act as confirmation to jurors who are asked to assess witness reliability. A current recommendation for eyewitness procedures is that identifications should be recorded and shown to jurors at trial, but this might be harmful if jurors are also negatively impacted by this suggestive feedback. The goal of the current study was to further evaluate how PIF can impact jurors’ assessments of witnesses. Across two experiments, I failed to find evidence that viewing eyewitnesses receiving PIF impacted mock-jurors’ perceptions of the witness or of their own performance. Additionally, the presence of PIF warnings in Experiment 2 did not impact participants’ perceptions of either the witness or their own performance. Given the recent push for videotaped identification procedures, the findings from these studies are timely and beneficial to the legal system.



Committee Chair

Papesh, Megan