@article{ref1,
title="Trauma memories on trial: is cross-examination a safeguard against distorted analogue traumatic memories?",
journal="Memory",
year="2015",
author="Segovia, Daisy A. and Strange, Deryn and Takarangi, Melanie K. T.",
volume="25",
number="1",
pages="95-106",
abstract="Trauma memories can feel more disorganised than more mundane memories. That may be problematic in legal contexts. Here we examined: (a) whether that disorganised feeling makes people more susceptible to suggestive questioning during direct examination; and (b) whether cross-examination is the safeguard it is purported to be: that is, we examined whether cross-examination can uncover and correct distorted trauma memories. We showed participants a film depicting a graphic car accident. For some participants, the film unfolded in a temporally disorganised way. We then interviewed participants immediately after the film regarding what they had seen: this 'direct examination' included free recall, cued recall and yes/no questions, some of which were misleading. Then, 48 hours later, a second interviewer cross-examined participants. Contrary to our predictions, neither manipulation of the film's temporal organisation, nor participants' self-reported feelings of event disorganisation significantly affected their accuracy of the film during direct or cross-examination nor their recognition memory of the film. Instead, we found that regardless of whether participants' memories were distorted by the direct examination, the suggestive nature of the cross-examination introduced sufficient doubt that participants were willing to change their answers. We conclude that traumatic memories are vulnerable to suggestive questioning and, unfortunately, cross-examination is not the legal system's fail-safe corrective influence.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0965-8211",
doi="10.1080/09658211.2015.1126608",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2015.1126608"
}