Look into my eyes: a "faceless" avatar interviewer lowers reporting threshold for adult eyewitnesses.

Evidential interviewing is often used to gather important information, which can determine the outcome of a criminal case. An interviewer's facial features, however, may impact reporting during this task. Here, we investigated adults' interview performance using a novel tool-a faceless avatar interviewer-designed to minimize the impact of an interviewer's visual communication signals, potentially enhancing memory performance. Adults were interviewed about the details of a video by (1) a human-appearing avatar or a human interviewer (Experiment 1; N = 105) or (2) a human-appearing avatar or a faceless avatar interviewer (Experiment 2; N = 109). Participants assigned to the avatar interviewer condition were (1) asked whether they thought the interviewer was either computer or human operated (Experiment 1) or (2) explicitly told that the interviewer was either computer or human operated (Experiment 2). Adults' memory performance was statistically equivalent when they were interviewed by a human-appearing avatar or a human interviewer, but, relative to the human-appearing avatar, adults who were interviewed by a faceless avatar reported more correct (but also incorrect) details in response to free-recall questions. Participants who indicated that the avatar interviewer was computer operated-as opposed to human operated-provided more accurate memory reports, but specifically telling participants that the avatar was computer operated or human operated had no influence on their memory reports. The present study introduced a novel interviewing tool and highlighted the possible cognitive and social influences of an interviewer's facial features on adults' report of a witnessed event.

"What Was His Name, Again?": A New Method for Reducing Memory-Based Errors in an Adult False-Belief Task.

Despite considerable interest in the development of Theory of Mind (ToM) during early childhood, until recently, there has been little consideration about whether and how ToM skills continue to change into adulthood. Furthermore, the false-belief task, which is believed to capture the underlying mechanisms of ToM, is rarely used in studies of ToM with adults; those tasks that do assess false-belief understanding may be confounded by incidental task demands, such as complex narratives and excessive memory requirements, making it difficult to isolate adults' true ToM skills, much less to compare them with the skills of children. Here, we adapted a task developed by Valle, Massaro, Castelli, and Marchetti (2015, https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v11i1.829) to assess false-belief understanding in adults. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. In the reading condition, participants read a story about the unexpected transfer of a ball between three brothers. In the video condition, participants watched a video version of the same story. Finally, in the training condition, participants were first trained on the names of the characters, before watching the video. Although condition did not affect participants' ability to correctly answer a standard false belief question ("Where does X think Y thinks the ball is?"), participants in the training condition used more mental state language to justify their responses ("Why does X think Y thinks the ball is here?"), and this improved performance was mediated by improved memory for the story details. We conclude that at least some "failures" of ToM use may be due to an inability to understand, recall, or communicate complex information in a ToM task, raising important questions about how best to measure ToM in adults (and children) in the future.