Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40729414›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)2026

Eyewitness testimony by individuals who stammer: Evidence, experience and perceived credibility.

Katie Maras, Sohee Park, Patrick Grafton, Jasmin Peat, Navyaa Toshniwal, Alice Haigherty, Kevin Guo, Monty Franks, Hannah Goodwin, Victoria Grau Sainz and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Katie MarasDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5265-6138
Sohee ParkDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Patrick GraftonDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Jasmin PeatDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Navyaa ToshniwalDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Alice HaighertyDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Kevin GuoDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Monty FranksDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Hannah GoodwinDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Victoria Grau SainzDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Amaira SharmaDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Alisa FridmanDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Luke Gordon-EllisDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Kirsten HowellsSTAMMA, London, UK.

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stammering may impede an individual's eyewitness testimony and reduce jurors' perceptions of their credibility through a complex interplay of bio-psycho-social factors. However, no research to date has explored this. Three co-produced, mixed-methods studies are reported, investigating the evidential quality, lived experiences and perceived credibility of people who stammer (PWS) as witnesses. In pre-registered Study 1, PWS recalled as much correct information as non-stammering witnesses overall. However, during the free - but not cued - recall interview phase, PWS provided fewer correct details. A reflexive thematic analysis of participants' post-testimony reflections captured how PWS experienced a cyclical relationship between communicative pressure, anxiety over listener misperceptions and stammer severity, which they navigated either by employing avoidance strategies at the expense of testimony or by speaking through their stammer. In pre-registered Study 2, mock jurors rated PWS as less confident yet more likeable and trustworthy than non-stammering witnesses. In Study 3, providing jurors with information about stammering further improved their likeability and trustworthiness but had no impact on perceived confidence. Findings provide new insight into communication disorders in legal contexts - and the unique challenges faced by PWS in particular - demonstrating the need for systemic accommodations and targeted training for legal professionals.

Indexed as

Mental RecallTrustAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adultcredibilityjurorslanguage disorderperceptionsrecallstammeringtestimonywitness

Identifiers

PMID40729414
PMCPMC12783885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.