Partners in recall: Collaborative order in the recall of a police interrogation

Abstract

Subjects watched a video‐recording of a police interrogation of a woman who alleged she had been raped. They were randomly divided into pairs. In the individual‐dyadic (ID) condition subjects first individually, and subsequently as a dyad, free‐recalled the interrogation, answered specific questions about it, and gave ratings of confidence. In the DI condition the order in which subjects undertook the tasks was reversed. Dyadic recall was no more complete when following than when preceding individual recall. Testimonial validity was, however, superior in the ID condition. Individual confidence, and not truth, was a better predictor of dyadic decision.