一直以来，我对具有司法含义的记忆感兴趣，因此我开始了目击者记忆的研究。
I had always been interested in the legal implications of memory, so I to investigate eyewitness memory.
事实上，多个目击者在法律场合就会有一个问题，因为辩护律师会指出记忆会有不同在重要的细节里。
There can actually be a problem with multiple witnesses in a legal setting as the defending lawyer can often show that memories differ in critical detail.
有时候尽管我们的记忆很清晰，但是它所包含的事情却有可能未曾发生过，或者并未如我们记忆中的那样发生。这也是为什么有时候目击者的证词与事实相去甚远。
We also all have memories – sometimes very clear ones – of events that didn't happen, or didn't happen the way we remember them, which is why eyewitness accounts of crimes are notoriously faulty.
如果目击者是根据几天前的记忆作图，这个比例还会进一步下降。
And this percentage dwindles further if the witness is working from a memory more than a few days old.
当将细节归类于“已记忆内容”时，7—16%的目击者更倾向于报告他们亲眼所见的细节。
The witnesses were from 7 to 16% more likely to be reporting a detail that they themselves saw when they put it in the "remembered" category.
目击者的记忆作为任何其他来源的证据已被仔细检查和评价。
The eyewitness memory as any other source of evidence has to be carefully checked and evaluated.
目击者的记忆始终是一个争论不休，其存在的整个历史学科。
Eyewitness memory has always been a subject of constant arguments throughout the whole history of its existence.
目击者的记忆：可靠程度是多少呢？
同时还探讨了警告对目击者讨论后的记忆准确性，记忆自信度以及记忆一致性的影响。
And at the same time, we explore the warning effects on memory accuracy, memory confidence and memory conformation after co-witness discussion.
实验1比较了共同目击者在有讨论与无讨论条件下的记忆情况，结果发现，讨论组被试对受到正确诱导的信息项目的记忆准确性，记忆自信度都高于无讨论组；
Study 1 compared co-witness discussion with no discussion, the result suggested that, participants who received the true post-event information are more accuracy and confidence than no discussion;
实验1比较了共同目击者在有讨论与无讨论条件下的记忆情况，结果发现，讨论组被试对受到正确诱导的信息项目的记忆准确性，记忆自信度都高于无讨论组；
Study 1 compared co-witness discussion with no discussion, the result suggested that, participants who received the true post-event information are more accuracy and confidence than no discussion;
应用推荐