Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May 7;27(6):973-988.
doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1754956.

Quality vs. quantity: the effect of relationship and number of corroborators on alibi assessments

Joseph Eastwood  1 , Christopher J Lively  2 , Brent Snook  2 , Mark D Snow  1
Affiliations

Quality vs. quantity: the effect of relationship and number of corroborators on alibi assessments

Joseph Eastwood et al. Psychiatr Psychol Law. .

Abstract

The effect of the suspect-corroborator relationship and number of corroborators on alibi assessments was examined across two experiments. In both experiments, we explored the effect of relationship type and number of corroborators on believability, likelihood of guilt, and decision to retain the suspect as the primary suspect; we increased the social distance between the alibi provider and suspect and the size of difference between the number of corroborators in Experiment 2. Collectively, our results support Olson and Wells' taxonomy of alibi believability as (a) any form of person evidence mitigates pre-alibi judgments of guilt (although there is a ceiling effect), and (b) alibis corroborated by non-motivated others were judged more favourably than those corroborated by motivated others. Our results lend support toward extending the original taxonomy to include the number of corroborators. The implications for the alibi assessments are discussed.

Keywords: alibi assessment; alibis; believability; corroborator; investigations; policing; wrongful convictions.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Aiman-Smith, L., Scullen, S.E., & Barr, S.H. (2002). Conducting studies of decision making in organizational contexts: A tutorial for policy-capturing and other regression-based techniques. Organizational Research Methods, 5(4), 388–414. doi: 10.1177/109442802237117 - DOI
    1. Allison, M., & Brimacombe, C.A.E. (2010). Alibi believability: The effect of prior convictions and judicial instructions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(5), 1054–1084. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00610.x - DOI
    1. Cohen, J. (1982). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Culhane, S.E., & Hosch, H.M. (2004). An alibi witness’ influence on mock jurors’ verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(8), 1604–1616. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02789.x - DOI
    1. Culhane, S.E., & Hosch, H.M. (2012). Changed alibis: Current law enforcement, future law enforcement, and layperson reactions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(7), 958–977. doi: 10.1177/0093854812438185 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources