Of guns and geese: a meta-analytic review of the ‘weapon focus’ literature

作者: Jonathan M. Fawcett , Emily J. Russell , Kristine A. Peace , John Christie

DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.599325

关键词:

摘要: Weapon focus is frequently cited as a factor in eyewitness testimony, and broadly defined weapon-related decrease performance on subsequent tests of memory for those elements an event or visual scene concurrent to the weapon. This effect has been attributed either (a) physiological emotional arousal that narrows attentional beam (arousal/threat hypothesis), (b) cognitive demands inherent processing unusual object (e.g. weapon) incongruent with schema representing (unusual item hypothesis). Meta-analytical techniques were applied test these theories well evaluate prospect weapon real-world criminal investigations. Our findings indicated presence overall (g= 0.53) was significantly influenced by retention interval, exposure duration, threat but unaffected whether occurred laboratory, simulation, environment.

参考文章(75)
Thomas H. Kramer, Robert Buckhout, Paul Eugenio, Weapon focus, arousal, and eyewitness memory: Attention must be paid. Law and Human Behavior. ,vol. 14, pp. 167- 184 ,(1990) , 10.1007/BF01062971
Patricia A. Tollestrup, John W. Turtle, John C. Yuille, Actual victims and witnesses to robbery and fraud: An archival analysis Adult Eyewitness Testimony. pp. 144- 160 ,(1994) , 10.1017/CBO9780511759192.008
Mark W.. Lipsey, David B Wilson, None, Practical Meta-Analysis ,(2000)
Joan R. Petersilia, Peter W. Greenwood, Jan M. Chaiken, Sorrel Wildhorn, Konrad Kellen, R. P. Castro, Linda L. Prusoff, The Criminal Investigation Process ,(1977)
Graham Pike, Nicola Brace, Sally Kynan, The visual identification of suspects: procedures and practice A Publication of the Policing and Reducing Crime Unit. ,(2002)
Mary Lee Smith, Gene V. Glass, Barry McGaw, Meta-analysis in social research Sage Publications. ,(1981)
Tin Valentine, Jan Mesout, Eyewitness identification under stress in the London Dungeon Applied Cognitive Psychology. ,vol. 23, pp. 151- 161 ,(2009) , 10.1002/ACP.1463
Stephen J. Ross, Roy S. Malpass, Moving Forward: Response to “Studying Eyewitness Investigations in the Field” Law and Human Behavior. ,vol. 32, pp. 16- 21 ,(2008) , 10.1007/S10979-007-9104-X
Thomas E. O'Rourke, Steven D. Penrod, Brian L. Cutler, Thomas E. Stuve, The external validity of eyewitness identification research: Generalizing across subject populations Law and Human Behavior. ,vol. 13, pp. 385- 395 ,(1989) , 10.1007/BF01056410