Criminal Eyewitness Testimony Eyewitness testimony, or the sworn oath of persons who believe they have witnesses a crime, or portion of a crime, has long been studied in both the fields of criminology and psychology. Research shows that a jury, for one, tends to convict a person when there is eyewitness testimony present by two to one odds. However, research also shows that criminal eyewitness testimony has the very real potential of being incorrect, and in fact has played a role in more than 75% of overturned and wrongful convictions using new criminological techniques and DNA testing (Eyewitness Misidentification, 2011). Thus, there is a very real concern with the contemporary judicial system that even at the best of times and with the best and most credible witness, eyewitness testimony is often suspect.

Literature Review -- The three articles under consideration are quite detailed in their literature review, citing examples from sociological, psychological, and criminological fields over the past several decades. Legal scholarship, however, both in criminology and criminal law, is typically based on one of two premises: how to best utilize eyewitness testimony in a given courtroom situation and/or how to best overturn any sense of accuracy that an eyewitness may have imparted to the jury. Most of the literature cited were various permutations of injustices proven later from eyewitness testimony, yet all cited more modern psychological research showing advances in human memory and cognition studies that debunk the validity of most recalled memories viewed once under extenuating circumstances (Benton, et.al., 2006; Clarke and Godfrey, 2008; Duke, et al., 2007;

Research Variables Duke, et.al., rely specifically on research reviews from both psychological and criminological studies to amass their data and viewpoint regarding the incorrect and widespread use of eyewitness testimony. Benton, et.al., and Clark and Godfrey, however, focus far more on the psychological literature, as well as their own research variables that focus on short- and long-term...

Whether this is because of skin tone, facial shape, racial attitudes, or even exposure to other races is unknown. However, the data tends to demonstrate that even people who are socially or culturally around other races regularly, and who have no predisposition toward racism still find it even more difficult to correctly identify the individual in question. In addition, once the evidence is collected, however, there is a period of time from several weeks to several months before the case is actually heard before a Jury. Of course, during that time, numerous factors intercede; media attention, changes in the witnesses personal life, belief systems, suggestions from others, and their own ability to recall. Then, once the witness is called in open court, there are even more factors present that may convolute the situation.
Sampling -- Since all three articles either utilize larger sampling pools than their own studies for validation, or combine past studies, the overall sample size tends to be quite large, and statistically viable. In most cases, samples used vary demographically over a larger population and are robust and longitudinal in character.

Research Design -- The two articles focusing on the psychological aspects of eyewitness testimony, Benton and Clark, use standard psychological modifiers and research design, including, but not limited to, double blind studies, extended variables, and more than one control. Duke follows a combination literature review and compilation and review of other research within the field.

Data Collection Methods -- Data collection methods, in combination, are quite adequate for the hypothesis under consideration and include; a large number of actual court cases and appellate testimony by expert witnesses, independent memory and recall studies using a wide population…