Research assesses the effects of intoxication and accuracy of eye witness accounts

by Lauren Haas, serious injury lawyer

In a study which will be of interest to all parties and the judiciary in both civil and criminal court litigation, the University of Abertay (Dundee) in conjunction with London South Bank University have found that eyewitness accounts are 6.95 times more likely to include wrong information after discussing a witnesses incident. Rather surprisingly, intoxicated witnesses were meanwhile found to accurately recall an incident albeit with fewer details.

The study was published in the journal Psychopharmacology and involved assessing a mix of sober and intoxicated participants who were then asked to recall a staged incident in which videos were shown of staged opportunistic thefts. Those brave participants willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in the interests of science were apparently rendered “moderately intoxicated” by consuming vodka and orange juice drinks. 

The study participants were assessed in pairs which each person in a pair watching different videos although they were advised they had watched the same video. Fifty per cent of the participants were then allowed to discuss what had happened.

As mentioned, those participants who had been allowed to discuss their video were not only found to be 6.95 times more likely to incorporate wrong information into their recollection, but 87.7 per cent of those actually mentioned at least one piece of information which they had heard from a person they had discussed the incident with.

Apparently, this finding remained the same even with intoxicated participants who were found to be no more prone to this than sober participants were. Interestingly, the consumption of alcohol did have an effect on the confidence of intoxicated participants of their own recollections, though.

The co-leader of the study, Dr Julie Gawrylowicz of Abertay University’s School of Applied Sciences, commented that: “Contrary to perceptions commonly held by the general public and many professionals working within the criminal justice system, our findings suggest that mild to moderate alcohol intoxication does not make individuals more susceptible to incorporating misleading information obtained from a co-witness…Our work also shows that alcohol does impact recall completeness but not accuracy, so mild to moderately intoxicated witnesses may be regarded as a reliable source of information, even if questioned in an intoxicated state. 

"It is important to note though, that this study tested memory at low to moderate intoxication levels, with a minimal delay before recall, and no other influencing factors.”

In my view, what this will also reinforce for civil lawyers is that early witness statements should be taken and that witnesses should be strongly discouraged to discuss what happened with other witnesses. 

Evidentially, the contemporaneous witness statements of intoxicated witnesses taken by the police at the scene of an accident may well have a more persuasive value and also explain a relative paucity of detail. 

On a personal level, I may well warn witnesses such as spouses of clients against discussing the incident until I have taken an early witness statement.

Find out more about Irwin Mitchell's expertise in helping people following road accidents at our dedicated serious injury section.

Contrary to perceptions commonly held by the general public and many professionals working within the criminal justice system, our findings suggest that mild to moderate alcohol intoxication does not make individuals more susceptible to incorporating misleading information obtained from a co-witness”