English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Eyewitness evidence can play a key role in juror decision making. This studyexamines the influence of eyewitness age (10 vs. 20 years old), type of descriptorinconsistencies (no descriptor inconsistencies, inconsistencies related to easy-to-change‘non-permanent’ features or inconsistencies related to difficult-to-change, ‘permanent’features), and familiarity with the defendant on participants acting as mock jurors’assessments of eyewitness and defendant integrity, continuous guilt ratings, anddichotomous verdicts. Participants were asked to read one of 12 versions of atrialtranscript and then answered a self-report questionnaire. Eyewitness age did not have asignificant effect on any dependent variables. Familiarity had a marginal effect on guiltassessments, both continuous and dichotomous. The presence of any descriptorinconsistencies led jurors to believe the eyewitness more, defendant less, and assign moreguilt to the defendant. However, the type, i.e. non-permanent or permanent, did notdifferentially impact assessments.

The influence of eyewitness age, type of descriptor inconsistencies, and familiarity with defendant on mock jurors' perceptions of eyewitness testimony