Alcohol Intoxicated Witnesses: Perception of Aggression and Guilt in Intimate Partner Violence

Many witnesses to violent crimes are alcohol intoxicated, but research is lacking regarding how alcohol affects their perception of aggression and guilt. This study investigated to what extent alcohol intoxicated eyewitnesses differed from sober witnesses regarding how aggressive and guilty they perceived the involved parts in an intimate partner violence (IPV) situation. 

Eighty-seven healthy men (n = 44) and women (n = 43) were randomized to an alcohol group (0.7 g/kg) or a non-alcohol group. In a laboratory setting, alcoholic/non-alcoholic drinks were consumed before viewing a film depicting IPV between a man and a woman. Ten min after viewing, in an interview, the participants rated how aggressive and guilty they perceived the involved parts to be. 

Alcohol intoxicated participants perceived both parts’ physically aggressive behavior as comparatively less severe, but their neutral behavior as more hostile. Sober witnesses perceived the man to be the most guilty part, whereas intoxicated witnesses distributed guilt more evenly. Alcohol had a strong but complex impact on the perception of aggression in IPV (i.e., heightened during the neutral interaction and lowered during physical aggression). 

These results may be explained by the cognitive consequences of alcohol’s anxiety-dampening effects. Regarding the asymmetric difference in perceived guilt, stereotypical expectations of gender-appropriate behavior in an IPV situation may need to be considered.

Purchase full article at:   http://goo.gl/QVuPNz

By:  Malin Hildebrand Karlén1, Emma Roos af Hjelmsäter1, Claudia Fahlke1, Pär Anders Granhag1,2, Anna Söderpalm Gordh3

1. ¹Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
2. ²Norwegian Police University College, Oslo, Norway
3. ³The Section of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden

1. Malin Hildebrand Karlén, Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Haraldsgatan 1, Box 500, S-405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden. Email:malin.karlen@psy.gu.se

 

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv_insight

And: http://twitter.com/Prison_Health

The Novel New Jersey Eyewitness Instruction Induces Skepticism but Not Sensitivity

In recent decades, social scientists have shown that the reliability of eyewitness identifications is much worse than laypersons tend to believe. Although courts have only recently begun to react to this evidence, the New Jersey judiciary has reformed its jury instructions to notify jurors about the frailties of human memory, the potential for lineup administrators to nudge witnesses towards suspects that they police have already identified, and the advantages of alternative lineup procedures, including blinding of the administrator. 

This experiment tested the efficacy of New Jersey’s jury instruction. In a 2×2 between-subjects design, mock jurors (N = 335) watched a 35-minute murder trial, wherein identification quality was either “weak” or “strong” and either the New Jersey or a “standard” instruction was delivered. Jurors were more than twice as likely to convict when the standard instruction was used (OR = 2.55; 95% CI = 1.37–4.89, p < 0.001). 

The New Jersey instruction, however, did not improve juror's ability to discern quality; rather, jurors receiving those instructions indiscriminatingly discounted “weak” and “strong” testimony in equal measure.

Below:  Proportion of Guilty verdicts (and 95% confidence intervals) by Instruction and ID Quality

Full article at:  http://goo.gl/278Jqk

By:  Athan P. Papailiou, David V. Yokum, Christopher T. Robertson

James E. Rogers College of Law, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America

David V. Yokum

Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America

More at:  https://twitter.com/hiv_insight

And:        http://twitter.com/Prison_Health