Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42211421›Full record

ArticlePsychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law2026

Can expert testimony and demonstrations influence juror perceptions of witness inattentional blindness?

Hayley J Cullen, Helen M Paterson, Celine van Golde

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 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

3 authors.

Hayley J CullenSchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0406-4912
Helen M PatersonSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9283-4349
Celine van GoldeSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1950-4722

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Witnesses may experience inattentional blindness (IB), failing to notice crimes occurring when focusing elsewhere. Witnesses who experience IB may be perceived negatively by jurors. The current studies aimed to determine whether expert testimony and demonstrations of IB can improve perceptions of witness IB. In two experiments, some participants completed a demonstration prior to reading a trial transcript containing the testimony of two witnesses (one of whom experienced IB). In both studies, some participants then read the testimony of an expert witness on the topic of IB within the trial. The findings revealed that the witness who experienced IB was perceived as less credible than the witness who saw the crime. Neither expert testimony nor demonstrating IB influenced this. These findings suggest that safeguards may not protect innocent witnesses who have experienced IB from legal charges.

Indexed as

expert testimonyinattentional blindnessjuriesjury decision-makingvisual metacognitionwitnesswitness evidence

Identifiers

PMID42211421
PMCPMC13215416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.