RT Article
T1 Differential mnemonic consistency differs between experienced and fabricated incidents
JF Psychology, crime & law
VO 26
IS 10
SP 990
OP 1005
A1 Lange, Thorsten
A2 Bell, Raoul
A2 Buchner, Axel 1961-
LA English
YR 2020
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1765995450
AB The degree of consistency of reports across several interviews is often taken as indicating whether a report is experience-based or fabricated. However, due to forgetting some aspects of mnemonic reports will be inconsistent across interviews independent of whether a report is experience-based or fabricated. The concept of differential mnemonic consistency implies that certain elements of experienced incidents such as core activities are remembered relatively well whereas other elements of experienced incidents such as peripheral activities are more easily forgotten. This difference in mnemonic consistency has been claimed to be higher for experienced-based than for fabricated reports. We tested this prediction. Participants experienced or fabricated an ‘examination’ in which their blood pressure, body height, and body weight were measured. N = 326 participants reported as many details as possible immediately and four weeks after the incident. Mnemonic consistency between reports was indeed higher for elements with high than for elements with low expected mnemonic consistency. Most importantly, this difference in mnemonic consistency was larger in experience-based than in fabricated reports. The results suggest that differential mnemonic consistency could serve as a supplemental criterion for distinguishing between experience-based and fabricated reports but further research is necessary to determine its usefulness in forensic practice.
K1 Statement credibility
K1 Credibility assessment
K1 Criteria-based Content Analysis
K1 Deception detection
K1 Eyewitness testimony
DO 10.1080/1068316X.2020.1744601