Eyewitness experience across mediums: a comparison of virtual reality, video, and live events
- Andrew Green(Author),
- Andrew Clark(Supervisor),
- Alexandra Tomlin(Supervisor)
Student Thesis:
Student thesis
Doctoral thesis
About the thesis
Eyewitness memory is a critical form of evidence in the criminal justice system which has been researched for decades; however, the mock crime videos and staged live events used in this research are often criticised. Displaying to-be-remembered events to participants using video stimuli lacks ecological validity, and while staged live events can provide a realistic experience, they lack experimental control. This thesis proposes virtual reality (VR) technology as a promising alternative to these traditional approaches. VR has been shown to elicit a sense of presence, a feeling of “being there” in a virtual world, as well producing physical, emotional and behavioural responses congruent with real world events. The four studies outlined in this thesis compare the experiences of participant-witnesses who viewed a to-be-remembered event in VR, on video, in VR and live in a staged event.
The aim of Study 1 was to compare the experiences of 54 participants who viewed a mock crime video on video or in VR. Heart rate was recorded before and during the stimulus, and measures of presence and emotion were taken. Following a 10-minute retention interval, participants completed free and cued recall tests to assess memory of the event.
Participants in the VR condition had a significantly higher general sense of presence, spatial presence and involvement in the scene, and had a greater increase in heart rate compared to the video condition. There were no significant differences in memory performance or emotional experience between these two conditions.
Study 2 followed the same method as the first, but aimed to resolve methodological issues by increasing the retention interval to 7 days, using a more emotional stimulus video, more sensitive measures of emotion and a larger sample (N = 74). As in Study 1, participants in the VR condition experienced a significantly higher general sense of presence, spatial presence and involvement, though there was no difference in heart rate. Again, it was seen that there was no difference in memory performance between the conditions, however participants in the VR condition reported a more emotional experience.
In Study 3, 141 participants viewed a to-be-remembered event either on video, in VR or were present at a live staged event. Presence, emotional experience, heart rate, and recall were compared across conditions, and it was seen that participants in the VR condition had an experience that was similar to those in the live-event condition, but suffered fewer negative physiological and emotional side effects. Participants in the video condition reported significantly lower presence, ecological validity, and heart rate changes compared to those in the VR condition. The experimental findings of Study 1-3 suggest that VR can offer a highly realistic witness experience while maintaining experimental control, making it a valuable tool for eyewitness memory research. To explore their experiences in more depth, 49 of these participants provided qualitative feedback, reported in Study 4, and three key themes were developed: Perception of Realness, Response to the Event and Experience of Participation. The qualitative findings support the experimental work in Study 1-3, but also highlight issues such as demand characteristics and attention allocation that warrant future investigation.
The aim of Study 1 was to compare the experiences of 54 participants who viewed a mock crime video on video or in VR. Heart rate was recorded before and during the stimulus, and measures of presence and emotion were taken. Following a 10-minute retention interval, participants completed free and cued recall tests to assess memory of the event.
Participants in the VR condition had a significantly higher general sense of presence, spatial presence and involvement in the scene, and had a greater increase in heart rate compared to the video condition. There were no significant differences in memory performance or emotional experience between these two conditions.
Study 2 followed the same method as the first, but aimed to resolve methodological issues by increasing the retention interval to 7 days, using a more emotional stimulus video, more sensitive measures of emotion and a larger sample (N = 74). As in Study 1, participants in the VR condition experienced a significantly higher general sense of presence, spatial presence and involvement, though there was no difference in heart rate. Again, it was seen that there was no difference in memory performance between the conditions, however participants in the VR condition reported a more emotional experience.
In Study 3, 141 participants viewed a to-be-remembered event either on video, in VR or were present at a live staged event. Presence, emotional experience, heart rate, and recall were compared across conditions, and it was seen that participants in the VR condition had an experience that was similar to those in the live-event condition, but suffered fewer negative physiological and emotional side effects. Participants in the video condition reported significantly lower presence, ecological validity, and heart rate changes compared to those in the VR condition. The experimental findings of Study 1-3 suggest that VR can offer a highly realistic witness experience while maintaining experimental control, making it a valuable tool for eyewitness memory research. To explore their experiences in more depth, 49 of these participants provided qualitative feedback, reported in Study 4, and three key themes were developed: Perception of Realness, Response to the Event and Experience of Participation. The qualitative findings support the experimental work in Study 1-3, but also highlight issues such as demand characteristics and attention allocation that warrant future investigation.