Does testimonial inconsistency indicate memory inaccuracy and deception? Beliefs, empirical research, and theory
Book Chapter
Fisher, RP, Vrij, A, Leins, DA. (2013). Does testimonial inconsistency indicate memory inaccuracy and deception? Beliefs, empirical research, and theory
. 9781461455479 173-189. 10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_7
Fisher, RP, Vrij, A, Leins, DA. (2013). Does testimonial inconsistency indicate memory inaccuracy and deception? Beliefs, empirical research, and theory
. 9781461455479 173-189. 10.1007/978-1-4614-5547-9_7
When eyewitnesses and criminal suspects change their sworn testimony, their credibility is challenged, either because inconsistent testimony is a sign that people have poor memories or because they are deceptive and can't keep their story straight. As reviewed below, inconsistency is the most often cited reason for discrediting others (e.g., Brewer, Potter, Fisher, Bond, & Lusczc, 1999; Granhag & Strömwall, 2000; Stromwall, Granhag, & Jonsson, 2003) and is often the attack point for impeaching witnesses in the courtroom. But is it justifiable? In support of this approach, research on memory warns us that changes in recollection may be the product of contamination from sources such as misleading questions, which could distort memory (Loftus, 1975; see Yarbrough, Hervé, & Harms, this volume). However, one can imagine just the opposite pattern: in an effort to sound truthful, good liars often simply repeat whatever they said earlier and, so, they may be more, not less, consistent than truth-tellers (Vrij, Granhag, & Mann, 2010). Perhaps the true meaning of inconsistency is not so obvious.
