Eyewitness researchers have shown that witnesses accurately choosing the culprit out of a lineup reach their decisions more quickly than those erroneously choosing an innocent individual. However, this research is silent regarding how quickly or slowly witnesses must be, in absolute terms, to indicate that they are accurate or inaccurate. Across 4 studies, the authors discovered that a time bou...

This article argues that an iconic event in the history of helping research—the story of the 38 witnesses who remained inactive during the murder of Kitty Genovese—is not supported by the available evidence. Using archive material, the authors show that there is no evidence for the presence of 38 witnesses, or that witnesses observed the murder, or that witnesses remained inactive. Drawing a di...

Witnesses and counterexamples produced by model checkers provide a very useful source of diagnostic information. They are usually returned in the form of a single computation path along the model of the system. However, a single computation path is not enough to explain all reasons of a validity or a failure. Our work in this area is motivated by the application of action-based model checking a...

This research examined whether confirming postidentification feedback following a mistaken identification impairs eyewitness memory for the original culprit. We also examined whether the degree of similarity between a mistakenly identified individual and the actual culprit plays a role in memory impairment. Participant-witnesses (N = 145) made mistaken identifications from a "similar" or a "dis...