Testifying remotely: The effects of interview modality on mock-witness statement quality

• In Event: Courts and Sentencing and Penal Decision Making 8. Judicial and Sentencing Policy

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic many legal proceedings were impeded due to corona measures. Courts and investigative authorities adapted quickly to avoid delays and backlogs in criminal investigations and trials, as well as in asylum procedures. One of the solutions to adapt to social distancing measures, was hearing witnesses, suspects and asylum seekers remotely by means of video-conferencing. The experiences with remote hearing were generally positive among the authorities because of its cost savings and flexibility. Hence, in several legal contexts it has been proposed to keep on using videoconferencing in investigative interviews, also after all corona measures are lifted. Little is known, however, about the effects of interview modality on the quality of the testimony obtained. In the current research we tested the effects of remote (vs. face to face) interviews on the length and accuracy of the testimony 62 mock-witnesses. We also explored differences in the tendency to go along with suggestion. Participants watched a video of a mock-robbery on a liquor store. Afterwards they were interviewed about the robbery either via Zoom or face-to-face following a structured interviewing protocol, containing a free recall, direct questions and suggestive questions. Results showed that mock-witnesses who were interviewed face-to-face provided significantly longer statements in their free recall than witnesses interviewed via Zoom. There were no significant differences between the groups when it comes to the number of accurate and inaccurate details or to their responses to suggestive questions. Although we only found differences in the length of testimony, the results do point to potential risks for truth-finding associated with testifying remotely and imply that further research on this topic is necessary before applying remote hearing on a large scale.

Authors

• Tanja van Veldhuizen, VU University Amsterdam

• Eva Zeldenrijk, Netherlands Labour Authority