Memorias percibidas de feitos experimentados e vistos en vídeo

Abstract

Credibility assessment of statements is one of the decisive pieces of evidence in judicial proceedings in crimes that occur in the private sphere. Therefore, it is essential to count with objective, reliable and valid methods, and procedures, that allows to assist the justice system in its work with a forensic psychological report. One of the techniques for this is the content analysis, with different tools widely used, such as the CBCA or the SEG. Similarly, it is key to the assessment process to obtain a good statement, and for this purpose, we have the cognitive interview as the most widely used and valid technique. Finally, it is necessary to be able to discern accounts based on memories of experienced events from those that are not, and specifically, from memories of viewed events by eyewitnesses of a crime. The aim of this doctoral thesis is to study whether content analysis tools can discriminate between memories of experienced events and memories of viewed events. Fort this purpose, three studies were designed. The first meta-analytic study examines the discriminative ability of the reality categories of the CBCA between fabricated memories of viewed events and fabricated memories of events, finding mixed results, with effect sizes ranging from positive to negative to null. The second study was designed to find out the quality of information recalled from viewed events based on hits, commission errors and omission errors, as well as the testimony persistence. The results showed that recall contains a higher rate of hits and omission errors, and that these errors were related to the core information about the event, as well as that the information remains unchanged over time, it is persistent. The third study of repeated measures aims to know the discriminative ability of the content criteria of the SEG between memories of experienced and viewed events obtain different results. On the one hand, the content categories have different discriminative ability between these memories. On the other hand, memories of viewed events statements do not constitute valid and sufficient evidence in 60% of the cases. And finally, the content categories on the robust model that distinguishes between memories of experienced and viewed events were identified. In short, from the general results obtained, we conclude that there are few experimental studies that analyse and compare the two types of memories, that the information remembered about a viewed event contains more hits, and more omission errors that commission errors, and, finally, that the SEG has the discriminative capacity to distinguish between the memory of an experienced event and the memory of a viewed event. Future research should take these findings into consideration and include them in their designs. Similarly, there is a need to expand the number of studies on the discriminative ability of content analysis tools to discriminate between memories of experienced events and memories of viewed events.