Spanos, N. P., Gwynn, M. I., & Terrade, K. (1989). Effects on mock jurors of experts favorable and unfavorable toward hypnotically elicited eyewitness testimony. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 922-926.
Mock jurors were told that a rape victim’s initial identification of the defendant was made either during a police interrogation or a hypnotic interrogation. Jurors given the hypnotic interrogation case then saw a videotape of an expert who was favorable toward hypnotically elicited testimony, an expert who was unfavorable, or both experts. Jurors’ private beliefs of the defendant’s guilt (assessed before exposure to the experts) was not influenced by knowledge that the witness had been hypnotized. However, jurors’ guilt ratings were significantly influenced by both the favorable and the unfavorable experts and by the process of deliberation. Juries in all treatments strongly favored acquittal, and jury verdicts were not significantly influenced by expert testimony. Juries hearing expert testimony favorable to hypnotically aided recall tended to convict more than juries that heard unfavorable testimony and juries that heard both versions of testimony in case in which victim’s testimony was elicited hypnotically.