What makes recovered-memory testimony compelling to jurors?
Law Hum Behav
; 25(4): 317-38, 2001 Aug.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-11501437
ABSTRACT
Little is known about how jurors arrive at verdicts in cases involving recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse. Study 1 investigated mock jurors' reactions to the recovered-memory testimony of an alleged victim when a therapist intervened with hypnosis, suggestion, or symptom management. When a therapist used hypnosis, jurors viewed the victim's recovered-memory testimony as particularly accurate and credible, and favored the victim in their verdicts. In Study 2, mock jurors were presented with a therapist who was sued for allegedly influencing a client's recall of false memories of abuse. In this case, however, jurors viewed therapists who used hypnosis or suggestion as more likely to have created false memories, more responsible for having caused harm, and less competent, and tended not to favor these therapists in their verdicts. We discuss these seemingly contradictory findings in terms of how culturally formed expectancies about hypnosis produce different causal explanations depending on the focus of a trial.
Buscar en Google
Colección:
01-internacional
Base de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Recuperación de la Función
/
Derecho Penal
/
Trastornos de la Memoria
Tipo de estudio:
Prognostic_studies
Límite:
Adolescent
/
Adult
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Law Hum Behav
Año:
2001
Tipo del documento:
Article
País de afiliación:
Estados Unidos