Reliability
The reliability of eyewitness testimony has been questioned by psychologists since the beginning of the 20th century. However, many early studies on the matter were regarded as insufficient. This questioning of its credibility began with Hugo Munsterberg, who first developed the field of Forensic Psychology. He specifically doubted the reliability of perception and memory in "On the Witness Stand." Interrogation was mentioned as an issue because of its intimidating methods. Through this he developed an early version of the lie detector. There was a torn reaction to his ideas; while the legal arena was in stern disagreement, it was popular among the public. It was not until forensic DNA testing began exonerating innocent people in the 1990s that the relationship between wrongful convictions and eyewitness testimony was confirmed. Studies by Scheck, Neufel, and Dwyer showed 52 of the first 62 DNA exoneration cases involved eyewitness testimony. The Innocence Project reports eyewitness misidentification occurs in approximately 75% of convictions that are overturned. In the USA, juries are responsible for assessing the credibility of witness testimony presented in a trial. Research has shown that mock juries are often unable to distinguish between a false and accurate eyewitness testimony. The confidence level of the witness is often seen by jurors to correlate with the accuracy of their testimony. An overview of this research by Laub and Bornstein shows this to be an inaccurate gauge of accuracy.
Read more about this topic: Eyewitness Testimony