Sex differences in eyewitness memory: A scoping review.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-30 DOI:10.3758/s13423-023-02407-x
Emma M Russell, Mitchell G Longstaff, Heather Winskel
{"title":"Sex differences in eyewitness memory: A scoping review.","authors":"Emma M Russell, Mitchell G Longstaff, Heather Winskel","doi":"10.3758/s13423-023-02407-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Researchers in cognitive and forensic psychology have long been interested in the impact of individual differences on eyewitness memory. The sex of the eyewitness is one such factor, with a body of research spanning over 50 years that has sought to determine if and how eyewitness memory differs between males and females. This research has significant implications across the criminal justice system, particularly in the context of gendered issues such as sexual assault. However, the findings have been inconsistent, and there is still a lack of consensus across the literature. A scoping review and analysis of the literature was performed to examine the available evidence regarding whether sex differences in eyewitness memory exist, what explanations have been proposed for any differences found, and how this research has been conducted. Through a strategic search of seven databases, 22 relevant articles were found and reviewed. Results demonstrated that despite the mixed nature of the methodologies and findings, the research suggests that neither males nor females have superior performance in the total amount of accurate information reported, but rather that females may have better memory for person-related details while males may perform better for details related to the surrounding environment. There was also consistent evidence for the own-gender bias. There was some consensus that differences in selective attention between males and females may underlie these sex differences in eyewitness memory. However, none of the studies directly tested this suggested attentional factor, and thus future research is needed to investigate this using a more systematic and empirical approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192654/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02407-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Researchers in cognitive and forensic psychology have long been interested in the impact of individual differences on eyewitness memory. The sex of the eyewitness is one such factor, with a body of research spanning over 50 years that has sought to determine if and how eyewitness memory differs between males and females. This research has significant implications across the criminal justice system, particularly in the context of gendered issues such as sexual assault. However, the findings have been inconsistent, and there is still a lack of consensus across the literature. A scoping review and analysis of the literature was performed to examine the available evidence regarding whether sex differences in eyewitness memory exist, what explanations have been proposed for any differences found, and how this research has been conducted. Through a strategic search of seven databases, 22 relevant articles were found and reviewed. Results demonstrated that despite the mixed nature of the methodologies and findings, the research suggests that neither males nor females have superior performance in the total amount of accurate information reported, but rather that females may have better memory for person-related details while males may perform better for details related to the surrounding environment. There was also consistent evidence for the own-gender bias. There was some consensus that differences in selective attention between males and females may underlie these sex differences in eyewitness memory. However, none of the studies directly tested this suggested attentional factor, and thus future research is needed to investigate this using a more systematic and empirical approach.

Abstract Image

目击者记忆中的性别差异:范围界定综述。
认知心理学和法医心理学的研究人员长期以来一直对个体差异对目击者记忆的影响感兴趣。目击者的性别就是这样一个因素,长达50多年的研究试图确定目击者的记忆在男性和女性之间是否以及如何不同。这项研究对整个刑事司法系统具有重要意义,特别是在性侵犯等性别问题的背景下。然而,研究结果并不一致,文献中仍然缺乏共识。对文献进行了范围界定审查和分析,以检查有关目击者记忆中是否存在性别差异的现有证据,对发现的任何差异提出了什么解释,以及这项研究是如何进行的。通过对7个数据库的战略性搜索,找到并审查了22篇相关文章。结果表明,尽管方法和研究结果喜忧参半,但研究表明,男性和女性在报告的准确信息总量方面都没有更好的表现,而是女性可能对与人有关的细节有更好的记忆,而男性可能对与周围环境有关的细节表现更好。也有一致的证据表明自己存在性别偏见。有一些共识认为,男性和女性在选择性注意力方面的差异可能是目击者记忆中这些性别差异的基础。然而,没有一项研究直接测试了这一建议的注意力因素,因此未来的研究需要使用更系统和实证的方法来调查这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信