Detecting criminal intent in social interactions: The influence of autism and theory of mind.

OBJECTIVE: Defense attorneys sometimes suggest that social-cognitive difficulties render autistic individuals vulnerable to involvement in crime, often arguing that theory of mind (ToM) difficulties that undermine inferences about others' intentions underpin this vulnerability. We examined autistic adults' ability to respond adaptively to criminal intent during interactions and whether difficulties were associated with poor ToM. HYPOTHESES: Compared with nonautistic adults, autistic adults were expected to be less likely to respond adaptively to another's criminal intent and less likely to do so early in interactions, with poorer performance associated with ToM difficulties. METHOD: We developed the Suspicious Activity Paradigm, in which autistic (n = 102) and nonautistic (n = 95) adults listened (as if participating in an interaction) to audio scenarios in which cues suggesting their impending involvement in a crime gradually emerged. At periodic intervals, they were required to indicate how they would react toward the other person's behavior, with response coding reflecting detection of, and adaptive responding to, suspicious activity. RESULTS: We observed similar patterns of suspicion and adaptive responses in autistic and nonautistic adults as the scenarios progressed. Regardless of diagnostic status, pronounced ToM difficulties and low verbal ability were independently associated with a lower likelihood of reporting suspicion and responding adaptively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the perspective that autistic adults are uniquely vulnerable to crime involvement due to an inability to recognize and respond adaptively to suspicious behavior. The potential for heightened criminal vulnerability was associated with significant ToM difficulties (and verbal ability) regardless of autism diagnostic status, although such difficulties were more prevalent in the autistic sample. The finding that pronounced ToM difficulties may heighten criminal vulnerability for both autistic and nonautistic individuals challenges the validity of a generalized "autism" legal defense based on assumed rather than measured ToM difficulties. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Cowitness identification speed affects choices from target-absent photospreads.

OBJECTIVE: Three studies examined the influence of a witness's identification speed on the identification decision of another witness. HYPOTHESES: Based on research documenting cowitness effects we expected cowitness speed to affect identification decisions from target-absent photospreads. Without prior research testing the effects of cowitness speed, we did not have a specific prediction regarding how fast (vs. slow) cowitness identification decisions would affect participant-witnesses' identification rates in Study 1. Based on the results from Study 1, in Study 2 we predicted that fast (vs. slow) cowitness decisions would increase choices from target-absent photospreads when the cowitness was known to have made a positive identification. In Study 3, cowitnesses rejected the photospread. Based on the previous studies, we hypothesized that fast (vs. slow) cowitness decisions would decrease choices from target-absent photospreads. However, because a photospread rejection is qualitatively different from an identification, this prediction was tentative. METHOD: In all three studies, participants watched one of 2 stimulus videos with a confederate cowitness. After the video, the confederate made a fast (10 s) or slow (4 min) identification. Participants then attempted an identification from a target-absent photospread. In Study 1 (N = 101), the confederate's decision from the photospread was ambiguous. In Study 2 (N = 200) the confederate announced making a positive identification. In Study 3 (N = 151) the confederate cowitness rejected the photospread. RESULTS: In all 3 studies, participants paired with a fast cowitness made more choices from the target-absent photospread than did participants paired with a slow cowitness. CONCLUSIONS: Fast cowitness identifications increased choices from the target-absent photospread regardless of whether a cowitness's decision was ambiguous (Study 1), whether they made an identification (Study 2), or rejected the photospread (Study 3). Given the effects of cowitness speed on identification decisions, it might be advisable to standardize the duration of identification procedures and inform witnesses of this standardization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence.

OBJECTIVE: The Executive Committee of the American Psychology-Law Society (Division 41 of the American Psychological Association) appointed a subcommittee to update the influential 1998 scientific review paper on guidelines for eyewitness identification procedures. METHOD: This was a collaborative effort by six senior eyewitness researchers, who all participated in the writing process. Feedback from members of AP-LS and the legal communities was solicited over an 18-month period. RESULTS: The results yielded nine recommendations for planning, designing, and conducting eyewitness identification procedures. Four of the recommendations were from the 1998 article and concerned the selection of lineup fillers, prelineup instructions to witnesses, the use of double-blind procedures, and collection of a confidence statement. The additional five recommendations concern the need for law enforcement to conduct a prelineup interview of the witness, the need for evidence-based suspicion before conducting an identification procedure, video-recording of the entire procedure, avoiding repeated identification attempts with the same witness and same suspect, and avoiding the use of showups when possible and improving how showups are conducted when they are necessary. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability and integrity of eyewitness identification evidence is highly dependent on the procedures used by law enforcement for collecting and preserving the eyewitness evidence. These nine recommendations can advance the reliability and integrity of the evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Interviewing witnesses: Eliciting coarse-grain information.

Eyewitnesses to crimes sometimes report inaccurate fine-grain details but fail to report accessible and potentially accurate coarse-grain details. We asked college students and community members (aged 17 to 62 years) who viewed a video of a simulated crime to answer interviewers' questions at coarse- and fine-grained levels of detail and measured the quantity and accuracy of their responses. Three experiments (overall N = 219) also (a) provided comparative data for participants who were interviewed using the open-ended Self-Administered Interview (Gabbert, Hope, & Fisher, 2009) or one of two "report everything" open-ended procedures, (b) tested the efficacy of the procedure using both written and verbal interviews, and (c) examined the generality of the findings across different encoding stimuli which required variations in the types of cued recall questions asked. Coarse-grain reporting seldom occurred under the free recall interview conditions. Witnesses provided abundant coarse-grain details when required to respond to probes about specific details (i.e., cued recall forced report conditions)-without obvious cost to overall accuracy relative to accuracy of similar detail reported under free recall conditions-regardless of whether they responded on a written questionnaire or in a face-to-face individual interview. These experiments suggest that a procedure that requires cued recall forced reporting of coarse-grain detail may offer potential in certain investigative situations as an adjunct to the widely recommended open-ended forensic interviewing techniques. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Can Lineup Administrators Blind to the Suspect's Identity Influence Witnesses' Decisions?

It is advocated that police lineup administrators should be blind to the identity of suspects to prevent them from influencing witnesses' decisions. Yet, it has been found that a lineup administrator who is blind to the suspect's identity may bias a witness's decision if he or she has previously administered the lineup to another witness to the same crime. In the present two experiments these findings are examined and expanded upon. Administrators blind to the suspect's identity presented a sequential lineup to a confederate and then a naïve witness under the manipulations of the confederate witness's decisiveness, confidence and decision speed. The findings of the previous study were not replicated; however, the second witness identifications matched the confederate's selection significantly more often when the confederate's decision was rapid rather than slow. Given the potentially dire consequences of such an effect, it is argued that different blind lineup administrators should be used for each witness to a crime.

Effects of a proven error on evaluations of witness testimony.

Witnesses frequently make an error when reporting events they have observed. Although some error in witness reports is to be expected and does not mean the testimony as a whole is flawed, an important question is how such an error affects judgments of credibility of the witness. In 2 experiments we investigated the impact of a single demonstrated (probative or nonprobative) detail inaccuracy on judgments of the likely reliability of witness memory. Potential mediators (witness dishonesty and forgetfulness) were examined to explain the relationship between inaccuracy and perceived reliability of the witness's memory report. The presence of a single inaccuracy affected observers' judgments of the reliability of the other elements of testimony and the testimony as a whole. There was also some evidence that the less probative the detail the more other elements of the reported account of the event were questioned. The mediation analyses showed that a single testimonial error contributed to the witness being perceived as dishonest or forgetful, attributions that in turn shaped perceptions of witness credibility. These findings suggest that legal professionals should be cautious when highlighting an isolated testimonial error given the potential for it to suggest more widespread testimonial unreliability. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mock-juror evaluations of traditional and ratings-based eyewitness identification evidence.

Compared to categorical identifications, culprit likelihood ratings (having the witness rate, for each lineup member, the likelihood that the individual is the culprit) provide a promising alternative for assessing a suspect's likely guilt. Four experiments addressed 2 broad questions about the use of culprit likelihood ratings evidence by mock-jurors. First, are mock-jurors receptive to noncategorical forms of identification evidence? Second, does the additional information provided by ratings (relating to discrimination) affect jurors' evaluations of the identification evidence? Experiments 1 and 1A manipulated confidence (90% vs. 50%) and discrimination (good, poor, no information) between participants. Evaluations were influenced by confidence, but not discrimination. However, a within-participant manipulation of discrimination (Experiment 2) demonstrated that evidence of good discrimination enhanced the persuasiveness of moderate levels of confidence, while poor discrimination reduced the persuasiveness of high levels of confidence. Thus, participants can interpret ratings-based evidence, but may not intuit the discrimination information when evaluating ratings for a single identification procedure. Providing detailed instructions about interpreting ratings produced clear discrimination effects when evaluating a single identification procedure (Experiment 3). Across 4 experiments, we found no evidence that mock-jurors perceived noncategorical identification evidence to be less informative than categorical evidence. However, jurors will likely benefit from instruction when interpreting ratings provided by a single witness. (PsycINFO Database Record

The grain-size lineup: A test of a novel eyewitness identification procedure.

When making a memorial judgment, respondents can regulate their accuracy by adjusting the precision, or grain size, of their responses. In many circumstances, coarse-grained responses are less informative, but more likely to be accurate, than fine-grained responses. This study describes a novel eyewitness identification procedure, the grain-size lineup, in which participants eliminated any number of individuals from the lineup, creating a choice set of variable size. A decision was considered to be fine-grained if no more than 1 individual was left in the choice set or coarse-grained if more than 1 individual was left in the choice set. Participants (N = 384) watched 2 high-quality or low-quality videotaped mock crimes and then completed 4 standard simultaneous lineups or 4 grain-size lineups (2 target-present and 2 target-absent). There was some evidence of strategic regulation of grain size, as the most difficult lineup was associated with a greater proportion of coarse-grained responses than the other lineups. However, the grain-size lineup did not outperform the standard simultaneous lineup. Fine-grained suspect identifications were no more diagnostic than suspect identifications from standard lineups, whereas coarse-grained suspect identifications carried little probative value. Participants were generally reluctant to provide coarse-grained responses, which may have hampered the utility of the procedure. For a grain-size approach to be useful, participants may need to be trained or instructed to use the coarse-grained option effectively.

Are regulatory strategies necessary in the regulation of accuracy? The effect of direct-access answers.

Previous studies have shown that, when people asked to retrieve something from memory have the chance to regulate memory accuracy, the accuracy of their final report increases. Such regulation of accuracy can be made through one of several strategies: the report option, the grain-size option, or the plurality option. However, sometimes an answer can be directly accessed and reported without resorting to such strategies. The direct-access answers are expected to be fast, have high accuracy, and be rated with high probabilities of being correct. Thus, direct-access answers alone could explain the increase of accuracy that has been considered the outcome of regulatory strategies. If so, regulatory strategies may not be needed to explain the previous results. In two experiments, we disentangled the effects of direct-access answers and regulatory strategies in the increase of accuracy. We identified a subset of direct-access answers, and then examined the regulation of accuracy with the plurality option when they were removed. Participants answered questions with six (Exp. 1) or five (Exp. 2) alternatives. Their task was, first, to select as many alternatives as they wanted and, second, to select only two or four alternatives. The results showed that the direct-access answer affected the regulation of accuracy and made it easier. However, the results also showed that regulatory strategies, in this case the plurality option, are needed to explain why the accuracy of final report increases after successful regulation. This research highlighted the relevance of taking direct-access answers into account in the study of the regulation of accuracy.

Archival analyses of eyewitness identification test outcomes: what can they tell us about eyewitness memory?

Several archival studies of eyewitness identification have been conducted, but the results have been inconsistent and contradictory. We identify some avoidable pitfalls that have been present in previous analyses and present new data that address these pitfalls. We explored associations among various estimator variables and lineup outcomes for 833 "real life" lineups, including 588 lineups in which corroborating evidence of the suspect's guilt existed. Suspect identifications were associated with exposure duration, viewing distance, and the age of the witness. Nonidentifications were associated with the number of perpetrators. We also consider some of the inherent, unavoidable limitations with archival studies and consider what such studies can really tell researchers. We conclude that differences in sampling prohibit sensible comparisons between the results of laboratory and archival studies, and that the informational value of archival studies is actually rather limited.

The dynamic interaction between eyewitnesses and interviewers: the impact of differences in perspective on memory reports and interviewer behavior.

Despite myriad possible differences in perspectives brought to an investigative interview by eyewitnesses and interviewers, little is known about how such differences might affect eyewitness memory reports or interviewer behavior. Two experiments tested the impact of such differences in a dynamic interaction paradigm in which participants served as eyewitnesses and interviewers. In Experiment 1 (N = 38 pairs), reporting goals for eyewitnesses and interviewers were manipulated in a factorial design, with participants instructed to provide or obtain either as much information as possible or only accurate information. Matching interviewer-interviewee instructions promoted accurate reporting, regardless of the actual content of the instructions. In Experiment 2 (N = 45 pairs), access to information about corroborating eyewitness identifications was manipulated in a factorial design. Corroborating information affected interviewers, but not eyewitnesses. When interviewers did not have access to corroborating information, they provided more negative feedback, and there was a trend toward interrupting more and asking more yes/no questions. These experiments indicate that differences in perspective can have effects on both the content of a witness's report and the behavior of an interviewer. The potential for differences in perspective should be considered in research on protocols intended to maximize eyewitness report accuracy.

Response format changes the reading the mind in the eyes test performance of autistic and non-autistic adults.

LAY ABSTRACT: Recognizing and understanding the perspectives of others-also called theory of mind-is important for effective communication. Studies have found that some autistic individuals have greater difficulty with theory of mind compared to non-autistic individuals. One purported theory of mind measure is the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET). This test presents participants with photographs of pairs of eyes and asks them to identify the emotion displayed by each pair of eyes from four choices. Some researchers have argued that the multiple-choice format of the RMET may not be an accurate measure of theory of mind, as participants could simply be guessing or using a process of elimination to select the correct answer. Participants may also be disadvantaged if they are not familiar with the specific emotion words used in the multiple-choice answers. We examined whether a free-report (open-ended) format RMET would be a more valid measure of theory of mind than the multiple-choice RMET. Autistic and non-autistic adults performed better on the multiple-choice RMET than the free-report RMET. However, both versions successfully differentiated autistic and non-autistic adults, irrespective of their level of verbal ability. Performance on both versions was also correlated with another well-validated adult measure of theory of mind. Thus, the RMET's multiple-choice format does not, of itself, appear to underpin its ability to differentiate autistic and non-autistic adults.

Revisiting the Relationship between Cybercrime, Autistic Traits, and Autism.

Reports of cybercrime being committed by people on the autism spectrum often imply that autism may be more prevalent among cybercriminals than the general population, although this remains unproven. In an online survey of 302 participants, we found that autistic individuals (n = 25) were more likely to report engagement in cybercrime than non-autistic individuals, but this relationship was not mediated by advanced digital skills or deficits in theory of mind. Furthermore, independent of autism diagnosis, autistic traits were not significantly associated with self-reported cyber-criminality. We propose that there may be additional factors moderating the relationship between autism, autistic traits, and cybercrime, such as specific autistic characteristics, understanding of cybercrime, and willingness to disclose criminal activity.

Autistic adults' perspectives on appropriate empathic responses to others' emotions.

Although the ability of autistic adults to recognize others' emotions has been extensively studied, less attention has been given to how they respond to these emotions. We examined two aspects of autistic and non-autistic adults' responsiveness to the emotional expressions of non-autistic actors: their perspectives on the appropriate way of responding to others' emotions and their awareness of others' perceptions of the likely appropriateness of such responses. Autistic (N = 63) and non-autistic (N = 67) adult samples viewed videos of 74 dyadic social interactions displaying different examples of 12 emotions expressed by one actor in response to the behavior of the other. After each video, participants (a) nominated the emotion expressed by the first actor, (b) offered their perspective on what would constitute an appropriate empathic response by the second actor, and (c) indicated their confidence in that response. Although the autistic group provided fewer appropriate empathic responses-operationalized via a panel's interpretations of normative responses-than the non-autistic group, within-group variability was marked, and the effect was weak and largely confined to basic emotions. Autistic individuals were, however, considerably less confident in their responses. Examination of the relationships between confidence in and the appropriateness of empathic responses provided no indication in either group of reliable discrimination of appropriate from inappropriate empathic responses or finely tuned metacognitive awareness of variations in appropriateness. In sum, autistic adults' perspectives on the appropriate empathic reactions to non-autistic adults' emotions were not unilaterally or markedly different to those of non-autistic adults.

Detecting dodgy behaviour: The role of autism, autistic traits and theory of mind.

LAY ABSTRACT: Difficulties in reading others' minds make it difficult to anticipate their future behaviour. It has often been argued that such difficulties contribute to autistic individuals becoming enmeshed in criminal activity. However, supportive scientific evidence is virtually non-existent. We compared the ability of groups of autistic and non-autistic adults of similar intellectual ability to detect dodgy or suspicious behaviour across a wide range of scenarios. Although the autistic group performed more poorly than the non-autistic group on an established measure of mindreading, there were no group differences in the ability to detect dodginess. Nor did we find any evidence that detecting dodgy behaviour was associated with the degree of autistic traits reported by individual participants. However, when we combined the two groups, difficulty reading the minds of others was indeed associated with poorer detection of dodginess, thus highlighting a characteristic of individuals that may well increase the likelihood of becoming involved in crime or exploited for autistic and non-autistic individuals alike.

Identifying the bad guy in a lineup using confidence judgments under deadline pressure.

Eyewitness-identification tests often culminate in witnesses not picking the culprit or identifying innocent suspects. We tested a radical alternative to the traditional lineup procedure used in such tests. Rather than making a positive identification, witnesses made confidence judgments under a short deadline about whether each lineup member was the culprit. We compared this deadline procedure with the traditional sequential-lineup procedure in three experiments with retention intervals ranging from 5 min to 1 week. A classification algorithm that identified confidence criteria that optimally discriminated accurate from inaccurate decisions revealed that decision accuracy was 24% to 66% higher under the deadline procedure than under the traditional procedure. Confidence profiles across lineup stimuli were more informative than were identification decisions about the likelihood that an individual witness recognized the culprit or correctly recognized that the culprit was not present. Large differences between the maximum and the next-highest confidence value signaled very high accuracy. Future support for this procedure across varied conditions would highlight a viable alternative to the problematic lineup procedures that have traditionally been used by law enforcement.

Sequential lineup presentation promotes less-biased criterion setting but does not improve discriminability.

When compared with simultaneous lineup presentation, sequential presentation has been shown to reduce false identifications to a greater extent than it reduces correct identifications. However, there has been much debate about whether this difference in identification performance represents improved discriminability or more conservative responding. In this research, data from 22 experiments that compared sequential and simultaneous lineups were analyzed using a compound signal-detection model, which is specifically designed to describe decision-making performance on tasks such as eyewitness identification tests. Sequential (cf. simultaneous) presentation did not influence discriminability, but produced a conservative shift in response bias that resulted in less-biased choosing for sequential than simultaneous lineups. These results inform understanding of the effects of lineup presentation mode on eyewitness identification decisions.

The information gained from witnesses' responses to an initial "blank" lineup.

Wells ("The psychology of lineup identifications," Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1984, 14, 89-103) proposed that a blank lineup (an initial lineup of known-to-be-innocent foils) can be used to screen eyewitnesses; witnesses who chose from a blank lineup (initial choosers) were more likely to make an error on a second lineup that contained a suspect than were witnesses who rejected a blank lineup (initial nonchoosers). Recent technological advances (e.g., computer-administered lineups) may overcome many of the practical difficulties cited as a barrier to the use of blank lineups. Our research extended knowledge about the blank lineup procedure by investigating the underlying causes of the difference in identification performance between initial choosers and initial nonchoosers. Studies 1a and 1b (total, N = 303) demonstrated that initial choosers were more likely to reject a second lineup than initial nonchoosers and witnesses who did not view a blank lineup, implying that cognitive biases (e.g., confirmation bias and commitment effects) influenced initial choosers' identification decisions. In Study 2 (N = 200), responses on a forced-choice identification test provided evidence that initial choosers have, on average, poorer memories for the culprit than do initial nonchoosers. We also investigated the usefulness of blank lineups for interpreting identification evidence. Diagnosticity ratios suggested that suspect identifications made by initial nonchoosers (cf. initial choosers) should have a greater impact on estimates of the likely guilt of the suspect. Furthermore, for initial nonchoosers, higher confidence in blank lineup rejections was associated with higher diagnosticity for subsequent suspect identifications. These results have implications for policy to guide the collection and interpretation of identification evidence.

Autistic Adults May Be Erroneously Perceived as Deceptive and Lacking Credibility.

We hypothesized that autistic adults may be erroneously judged as deceptive or lacking credibility due to demonstrating unexpected and atypical behaviors. Thirty autistic and 29 neurotypical individuals participated in video-recorded interviews, and we measured their demonstration of gaze aversion, repetitive body movements, literal interpretation of figurative language, poor reciprocity, and flat affect. Participants (N = 1410) viewed one of these videos and rated their perception of the individual's truthfulness or credibility. The hypothesis was partially supported, with autistic individuals perceived as more deceptive and less credible than neurotypical individuals when telling the truth. However, this relationship was not influenced by the presence of any of the target behaviors, but instead, by the individual's overall presentation.

Facing up to others' emotions: No evidence of autism-related deficits in metacognitive awareness of emotion recognition.

Emotion recognition difficulties are considered to contribute to social-communicative problems for autistic individuals and awareness of such difficulties may be critical for the identification and pursuit of strategies that will mitigate their adverse effects. We examined metacognitive awareness of face emotion recognition responses in autistic (N = 63) and non-autistic (N = 67) adults across (a) static, dynamic and social face emotion stimuli, (b) free- and forced-report response formats, and (c) four different sets of the six "basic" and six "complex" emotions. Within-individual relationships between recognition accuracy and post-recognition confidence provided no indication that autistic individuals were poorer at discriminating correct from incorrect recognition responses than non-autistic individuals, although both groups exhibited marked inter-individual variability. Although the autistic group was less accurate and slower to recognize emotions, confidence-accuracy calibration analyses provided no evidence of reduced sensitivity on their part to fluctuations in their emotion recognition performance. Across variations in stimulus type, response format and emotion, increases in accuracy were associated with progressively higher confidence, with similar calibration curves for both groups. Calibration curves for both groups were, however, characterized by overconfidence at the higher confidence levels (i.e., overall accuracy less than the average confidence level), with the non-autistic group contributing more decisions with 90%-100% confidence. Comparisons of slow and fast responders provided no evidence of a "hard-easy" effect-the tendency to exhibit overconfidence during hard tasks and underconfidence during easy tasks-suggesting that autistic individuals' slower recognition responding may reflect a strategic difference rather than a processing speed limitation. LAY SUMMARY: It is generally considered that autistic individuals may have difficulty recognizing other people's facial emotions. However, little is known about their awareness of any emotion recognition difficulties they may experience. This study indicates that, although there is considerable individual variability, autistic adults were as sensitive to variations in the accuracy of their recognition of others' emotions as their non-autistic peers.