模棱两可的犯罪与非注意盲视：目击者记忆的科学

ABC收听，提供播客、广播、新闻、音乐等内容。

ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

你好。

Hello.

我是安妮贝尔·克拉布。

I'm Annabelle Crabb.

我倒不觉得自己是收藏狂，但就是舍不得扔东西。

Now I wouldn't say I'm a hoarder exactly, but I do hang on to things.

这可不只是你我这样。

It's not just you and me.

澳大利亚最古老的图书馆里，塞满了不是书的东西。

Australia's oldest library is crammed with stuff that isn't books.

糟糕的画作、旧菜单、人类的头发。

Terrible paintings, old menus, human hair.

这到底是历史保存，还是过度收藏？

Is this history or hoarding?

来翻一翻这些物品背后关于我们自己的故事吧。

Come and have a rummage through the story of us told by our stuff.

在ABC Listen或者你常用的播客平台搜索《历史还是囤积》这个节目。

Search for the history or hoarding podcast on ABC Listen or wherever you get your podcasts.

你正站在公交站台。

You are at a bus stop.

你刚到不久，一个女孩就被送到了这里。

A young girl is dropped off not long after you're there.

几分钟后，一位年长的女士走过来，给了女孩一块巧克力。

And minutes later, an older woman comes by and gives the girl a bar of chocolate.

然后她们手拉手离开了。

And then they walk off holding hands.

你刚刚是不是目睹了一起犯罪？

Did you just witness a crime?

令人不安的是，你可能根本说不清楚。

The unsettling answer is you might not be able to tell.

说到绑架，我觉得我们能让听众去思考这个问题。

With kidnapping, I think, you know, we get the audience to think about it.

一听到绑架，他们大概会想象一个陌生人靠近孩子，孩子大喊大叫、踢打挣扎，然后被拖进车里，开车跑掉。

When they hear kidnapping, they probably think stranger comes up to child, child makes a fuss, kicks and screams, kidnapper pulls them into their van, drives off.

但我们脑子里对绑架的这种印象，可能和实际情况相差很远。

But that mental representation we have might be very different to how kidnapping actually occurs.

如果你当时根本没觉得有什么异常，那几天、几个月，甚至几年后，你还记得多少细节？

And if you didn't recognize it as anything out of the usual at the time, how much of it will you be able to remember days, months, even years later?

记忆消退得非常快。

Memory decays very rapidly.

就在经历事情后的第一个小时里，我们就会忘记大约六成的细节。

So within the first even hour that we've experienced something, we will forget about 60% of details of what we've witnessed.

这里是ABC国家广播电台的《心灵全貌》，我是萨娜·卡达尔，这是我们的特别系列《法医心理》第三集。

On All in the Mind from ABC Radio National, I'm Sana Qadar, and this is part three of our special series Forensic.

这一集讲的是破案中用到的心理学手段。

It's all about the psychological tools used to crack crimes.

哪些方法有效，哪些无效，还有那些出人意料的失误方式。

What works, what doesn't, and the surprising ways things can go wrong.

今天聊聊目击者记忆。

Today, eyewitness memory.

《All in the Mind》的资深制作人詹姆斯·布伦南在这里。

All in the Minds senior producer James Bullen is here.

嗨，萨娜。

Hi, James.

嗨，詹姆斯。

Hi, Sana.

在案件中，目击者记忆的使用频率高吗？

So how often is eyewitness memory used in cases?

在澳大利亚，这非常常见。

It's used very frequently in Australia.

对法庭、陪审团和司法系统来说，这是一种特别有说服力的证据。

It's a really persuasive form of evidence for courts, juries, justice systems.

所以一旦有目击证人的证词，法庭几乎肯定会采纳并使用它。

So if an eyewitness testimony is available, chances are that it will be caught upon in a court and it will be used.

我之前采访过塞琳·范戈尔德博士，她上一期节目也来过，谈过虚假供述的问题。

Now I spoke to doctor Celine van Golde who we also had on the last episode of the show talking about false confessions.

她是悉尼大学的副教授。

She's an associate professor at the University of Sydney.

DNA证据、指纹，或者其他体液痕迹，只能说明一个人可能到过现场，但不能证明他一定犯了罪。

DNA evidence, fingerprint evidence, any other type of bodily fluids indicates that a person might have been there but not that they committed a crime necessarily.

而目击证人的证词却能做到这一点。

Well, eyewitness does that.

还有很多案件，比如家暴或者其他类型的犯罪，往往唯一可用的证据就是受害者或目击者的记忆。

And there's also a lot of crimes like domestic violence or any type of other crime where often the only evidence that 's there is somebody's memory, is the victim or the witness.

因此，在案件正式上法庭之前，目击记忆本身就具有很大的价值。

So for that reason, before it even goes to court, there is a lot of value in eyewitness memory.

那么，这种证词在法庭上到底有多大的分量呢？

And how much weight is put on this kind of testimony?

塞琳说，法庭系统对目击者证词赋予了极大的分量。

Celine says a huge amount of weight is put on eyewitness testimony in court systems.

当一个人坐在那里，眼里含着泪说：‘我亲眼看见了’。

When there is a person sitting there, tears in her eyes saying like, I saw this with my own eyes.

我百分之百确定，那个人就是凶手。

I'm a 100% certain that's the person that murdered the other one.

这对陪审员和法官都具有非常强烈的情感冲击力。

It has a very emotive and a strong impact on jury members and on judges.

陪审团研究也表明，这是在陪审团审判中最具说服力的证据之一。

Jury research has also shown that it is one of the most powerful pieces of evidence that you can provide within a jury trial.

明白了。

Okay.

所以，目击者记忆的后果真的非常重大。

So it sounds like the stakes around eyewitness memory are really high.

但塞琳·范·戈尔德也提到，这里确实存在不少问题。

But Celine van Golde also mentioned that there are, you know, shortcomings here.

那这意味着什么？

So what does that mean?

接下来我们就来讲这个。

That's where we're gonna go next.

有很多因素会影响我们对犯罪事件的回忆准确性。

We've got various factors that will influence how accurately we can recall a crime.

比如我们的年龄就会有影响。

And that's for example, our age will have an influence.

孩子对目击事件的回忆，和成年人完全不同。

So a child will recall something that they've witnessed completely different than an adult will.

还有，比如我们当时有没有集中注意力，或者有多紧张。

But also, for example, if we are paying attention or how stressed that we are at the time that we are recalling something.

这些因素都会影响我们当时编码记忆的过程。

And these are factors that will impact our memory at the time that we are encoding what is happening to us.

编码是我们形成记忆的第一步。

Encoding is the first step in how we remember.

记忆的过程包括编码、存储，然后是提取。

The steps of memory go encoding, storage, then retrieval.

不过咱们先聚焦在第二步：存储。

But let's focus on step two, storage.

这就是把我们看到的信息转入记忆，留着以后再调用。

So this is when we transfer what we're seeing into our memory to be stored and then recalled at a later point in time.

我们如何存储记忆，也会影响我们记得什么、怎么记得。

Now, how we store our memory will also impact what and how we remember things.

比如说，我们是怎么给某些记忆贴标签的。

And this is, for example, how we tag certain memories.

我们已有的知识，能帮我们把接收到的信息整理好，有条理地存起来。

So the pre existing knowledge that we have will help us to organise all this information that is coming in and store it in a cohesive way.

说到贴标签，具体是指什么呢？

And just to pick up on the tagging, so what does that mean exactly?

咱们看大脑，它本质上就像一个庞大的神经网络，我们经历的每一点信息，都会被存进这个由无数小节点互联组成的网络里。

So if we look at our brain, it's technically like a big neural network where we have we get all little pieces of information that we experience and then we try to store it in this specific like network of little nodes that are interconnected.

比如说，我目睹了一场车祸，我知道有车参与，可能有碎玻璃，可能有伤者，还可能有另一辆车撞上了树。

So for example, if I witness a car crash, I've got this piece of information that there was a car involved, there might be broken glass, there might be victims stare, there might be a second car that crashed into a tree.

这些零散的信息，我都会试着存进我的大脑网络里，跟这场车祸关联起来。

So there's all little pieces of information that I'm trying to store in my network or in my neural network for this car crash.

然后我会给它贴个标签，比如提醒自己：这是我看过的那场车祸。

And then I will tag it or I will put like a little reminder like this is the car crash that I witnessed.

因为我了解什么是车祸——即使我以前没亲身经历过，但通过电视或文章，我知道它是什么样子，所以我能判断：这是一场车祸。

And because I know what a car crash is, maybe I've never experienced one before but I've known it from TV or reading about it, I can say this is a car crash.

等以后我想回忆起来，只要想到‘车祸’这个标签，那些细节就会自动浮现出来。

And if I later on wanna retrieve that information, I just have to think back about that tag that I gave it, like car crash, and then those details will come back.

大多数时候，这些细节都来自你当时亲身经历的那件事。

Mostly, that will be the details you experienced in this particular event.

就是你亲眼看到的那场车祸。

Here, the car crash that you witnessed.

不过，标签之间可能会有重叠。

But tags can overlap.

另外一种情况是，我可能在电视剧里看过别的车祸，这些画面在回忆自己亲历的那场车祸时也会冒出来，导致我把别人看到的细节误以为是自己亲眼所见。

So what can happen as well is that there's other car crashes that I've witnessed in TV shows, and that also might, like, light up when I try to recall this original car crash that I've witnessed myself and I might recall some details that I've actually not witnessed but witnessed somewhere else.

如果想想小孩子，他们可能根本没听说过车祸这回事。

If we think about really young kids, they might not have even heard about a car crash.

他们只是看到车子撞在一起，心里想：哦，有车，有碎玻璃，有人受伤了。

So they just see these cars crashing into each other and they're like, oh, there's cars, there's broken glass, there's people that are injured.

但就连‘受伤的人’这种画面，对他们来说都可能是头一回见，要他们把这一切有条理地记下来，再贴上一个明确的标签，就太难了。

But even like an injured person might be the very first time that they experience it, so for them to coherently store that and then give like one little tag becomes a lot more difficult.

所以，等他们后来想回忆时，往往需要有人帮忙引导，才能把看到的内容完整地梳理出来。

So, they often need to be like, assisted when they're trying to recall that information later on to coherently being able to recall everything that they've observed.

对成年人来说，西琳说，整理起来其实容易多了，因为随着时间推移，我们早就学会了怎么分类和存储接收到的信息。

For adults, Celine says that it's actually a lot easier to organise because over time, we've learnt how to sort and store the information that's coming in.

但我们还是会出错，毕竟经历过太多相似的事，一旦记不清具体细节，就容易把以前见过的或从别处看到的情节，填补进自己的记忆里。

But we can still make mistakes because we have a lot of similar experiences, so we might, if we don't remember specific detail, we might fill that gap into our memory with a detail from a previously experienced incident or something that we've witnessed somewhere else.

这种情况，我们就叫它‘来源混淆’。

And when that happens, we call that a source monitoring mistake.

所以我们搞混了信息的来源，分不清这些记忆到底来自哪里。

So, we are confusing our sources between our sources where this information is coming from.

我想回忆自己亲眼看到的那起车祸，但记忆有缺口，就下意识从别的地方补上了——比如电视里看过的车祸场景。

I'm trying to remember the specific car incident that I've witnessed, but I've got some gaps in my memory, I'm filling it in and I'm taking it from a different source, a car crash that I saw on a TV episode.

西琳说，这种记忆来源混淆的情况，其实比我们想象的更常见。

Celine says that these source monitoring mistakes, that's our brains filling gaps with information from elsewhere, happen more often than we think.

记忆消退得非常快。

Memory decays very rapidly.

就在经历事情后的第一个小时里，我们就会忘记大约六成的细节。

So within the first even hour that we've experienced something, we will forget about 60% of details of what we've witnessed.

我们忘记的内容不是随机的，那些对我们重要、当时特别留意的细节，反而更容易留下来。

It's not arbitrary what we forget, so we will keep on remembering those details that were central to us, that we paid attention to, that we focused on.

随着时间推移，到了几天甚至几个月后，我们大概还能记得当初目击的那起事件中三成左右的细节。

And then over time, we see that about and this is goes into days and months that we remember about 30% of all the details of that specific one off incidents that we witnessed.

这其实很合理，毕竟平时走在街上，谁也不会料到会碰上犯罪或车祸。

And it actually makes sense because when you go out in the street, you're not expecting to come across a crime or to witness a car accident.

你可能从头到尾都没太留意，突然间就被吸引住了。

So you might not be paying attention from start to finish, it might be all of a sudden your attention gets like captured by it.

你亲眼看到的这种情况，跟为了考试死记硬背完全是两码事。

You witness it and then it's different than if you study for a test where your sole focus is on just remembering what you're learning.

发生这种事的时候，现场太乱了，一堆事情同时在发生。

With an incident like that, so many things are going on.

所以你虽然看到了很多，但其实也漏掉了不少细节。

So, while you observe everything, you also forget a lot of those details.

现在的情况是，你大概只记得百分之三十，但同时你又特别想把事情说清楚——警察会来问，朋友会来问，家人也会来问，你自然想给出答案。

Now, what then happens is you remember about 30%, but at the same time there's a pressure on you to remember certain things because police will come and ask you questions, friends might ask you questions, family might ask you questions, so you're eager to provide answers.

而我们记忆里那些天然的空白，很容易被外界的信息填上，比如别人问你：‘那辆蓝车出事前是不是开得特别疯？’

Now, those natural gaps that are in our memory can actually quite easily be filled with information from different sources and that can be a person asking a leading question, so, oh, what was the blue car doing, like, they driving erratically before they crashed?

这句话其实已经暗示了车是蓝色的，可我之前根本没注意，或者根本没记住是蓝色，可你一听，就可能把‘蓝色’这个信息塞进自己的记忆里，当成自己亲眼看到的。

And that question already implies that the car was blue, even though I might not have said that before or not remember it that way and then I can take that information and slot that into my memory for the color of the car that I witnessed.

也可能是另一个目击者说：‘天啊，你看见没？那人直接一拳打在对方脸上！’

It can also be that my co witness, another person that's heard, like, my god, did you just see how that one person punched the other one?

我不记得有这一幕，但另一个人也看到了，明确说确实有人打了人，于是这下子我也觉得这事儿发生在我眼前了。

And while I don't remember that, well, there's another person that watched it as well and clearly there was a punch, so now all of a sudden that becomes part of my memory as well.

这其实也跟上一集我们聊到的内容有关——在审讯中，问题措辞稍作改动，就能改变人对事件的记忆。

This is also related to what we heard about last episode of the series, where in interrogations, small changes in how questions are asked can alter the way someone remembers an event.

塞琳娜·范戈尔德提到，人对事件的回忆平均只能保留30%，这真让我大吃一惊。

But the percentages Celine van Golde mentioned only remembering about 30% of an event, that was shocking to me.

我们当然记得那些关键细节，不然根本没法正常生活，那生活就成假的了。

We do remember details that are right because otherwise we wouldn't be able to function, right, and a life would be a lie.

我们还是挺擅长记住一些重要事情的，只是那些周边的细节，如果只是回想童年往事，其实漏掉一点也无伤大雅。

So we're still good at remembering certain things, but it is a lot of surrounding details that might not be necessarily detrimental to anything in our daily life if we think back about our childhoods.

但一旦涉及刑事案件，就特别关键了——你到底亲身经历了什么，又有哪些是后来被别人灌输或自己脑补出来的，这直接关系到是冤枉好人还是还人清白。

But when it comes to crimes, then it becomes very important which ones of these details we've actually experienced and which ones we've gotten or reconstructed, so to say, because that can be the difference between a wrongful conviction or a rightful conviction.

可能错把无辜的人当成罪犯，也可能让真正的罪犯逍遥法外。

It can be accusing somebody of something they didn't do or it become a miscarriage of justice.

在司法体系里，记忆到底是怎么运作的，这会对司法公正造成严重伤害。

When it comes to a legal system, how a memory works can be quite damaging for a justice system and for the integrity of a justice system.

这里是ABC广播国家台，您正在收听《全在心中》。

From ABC Radio National, you're listening to All in the Mind.

我是萨娜·卡达尔。

I'm Sana Qadar.

今天，记者詹姆斯·布伦南要探讨一个问题：目击证人的证词到底有多可靠？

Today, reporter James Bullen is asking, how reliable is eyewitness testimony?

好的，萨娜。

Okay, Sana.

我现在想给你看一段视频。

I wanna show you a video now.

好。

Okay.

你可能之前看过，不过咱们再一起看一下。

You might have seen it before, but let's let's have a look.

我先把手机递给你。

I'm gonna pass you the phone.

好。

Okay.

这是一个注意力测试。

It's an awareness test.

对。

Right.

我以前好像没做过这类测试，不确定是不是看过这个，不过咱们看看吧。

I don't think I've done one before, so I don't know if I've seen this, but let's see.

好。

Okay.

我现在看到一个黑屏，上面写着‘注意力测试’。

So I see a black page that says awareness test.

好。

Okay.

现在画面里是一群手里拿着篮球的男人。

Now it's like a lineup of guys with basketballs.

他们穿着运动装。

They're wearing sporty clothes.

他们传了多少次球？哦，我刚才没听清问题。

How many passes does the oh, I've missed the question.

我光顾着描述我看到的画面了。

I was so busy explaining what I'm seeing.

他们一共传了多少次球？

How many passes do they make?

好吧。

Okay.

我不知道。

I don't know.

这传球次数真不少。

This is a lot of passes.

现在屏幕上出现了数字13。

And now the number 13 has flashed up.

你看到那个月球漫步的熊了吗？

Did you see the moonwalking bear?

没有。

No.

没看到。

No.

我光顾着慌张，怕自己错过了问题的开头，天哪。

I was too busy panicking about how I had missed the first bit of the question and my gosh.

真有个月球漫步的熊？

There was a moonwalking bear?

哦，原来如此。

Oh, okay.

明白了。

Right.

那儿就是那个月球漫步的熊。

There's the moonwalking bear.

是的

Yeah.

这次我看到他了

I see him now this time around.

太好笑了

That's so funny.

谁都容易错过

It gets everyone.

他就站在画面正中间

He's like right in the middle of the frame.

对

Yeah.

有趣的是，所有人都穿着色调很低调的衣服

It is funny because all the they're all wearing kind of it it's quite a muted tone.

大家都穿的是灰的、黑的、棕的，所以如果你不知道他在那儿，这只熊真的很容易和背景融在一起

So they're all wearing kind of grays and blacks and browns, and so the bear really does, unless you know he's there, he kind of blends into the background.

但我觉得自己特傻，结尾还提醒大家注意骑车的人。

But I feel so silly, and then the end says, look out for cyclists.

这真是个很棒的安全提示。

So that's a very good PSA.

这个提示挺好的。

That's a good PSA.

这确实是个很好的安全提示。

That's a good that's a good PSA.

我才不会觉得傻呢。

But I wouldn't feel silly.

每个人都会中招。

It gets absolutely everyone.

我第一次看这个视频的时候就被骗到了，这正是‘无意盲视’这个概念的绝佳例子。

It got me the first time I watched this video, and it's a really good example of this concept called inattentional blindness.

当我们大脑负担太重，正在处理复杂任务时，就算有东西就在眼前，也可能完全注意不到。

So where we have some sort of cognitive loading, we're doing some complex task, we can miss things that are right in front of our faces.

这是一种很奇特的现象，而且对目击者证词有着非常严重的后果。

And it's a kind of bizarre phenomenon that occurs and that has some really serious implications for eyewitness testimony.

如果你们想看这个视频，家里的听众们，我们也会在节目笔记里附上链接。

And if you want to see this video, those of you listening at home, we'll link to it in our show notes as well.

注意力盲区这个词听起来挺复杂，其实挺简单的。

So inattentional blindness, it sounds like a complicated term, but it's it's pretty simple.

说白了就是眼睛看了，但没看见。

It's essentially looking without seeing.

这是麦考瑞大学心理科学学院的海莉·卡伦博士。

That's doctor Hayley Cullen, a lecturer in the School of Psychological Sciences at Macquarie University.

意思是，当你把注意力集中在某件事上时，可能会完全忽略掉周围其他非常明显且重要的东西。

So it's the idea that when you're focusing your attention on something specific, you can fail to notice other very obvious and important things in your environment.

比如目击者，如果他正专心开车，或者在公园里照看孩子，哪怕犯罪就发生在眼前，他也可能完全没注意到。

So for a witness, if they're focusing their attention on driving or watching their kids at the park or something very specific, a crime might actually happen in front of them that they just don't even notice at all.

这听起来有点反直觉。

This feels counterintuitive.

很难让人相信。

It's hard to believe.

怎么可能有人连眼前的东西都看不见？

How could someone miss something right in front of them?

但海莉说，这种事确实会发生。

But Hayley says it definitely does happen.

波士顿有个案子，一名叫肯尼·康利的警察，有天晚上被叫到公园处理一起犯罪事件。

There was a case in Boston of a police officer, Kenny Conley, and he was called to the scene of a crime in a a park one night.

他赶到现场，看到了嫌疑人，立刻追了上去。

He arrives at the scene, he sees the the suspect, and he pursues them on foot.

肯尼和其他在场的警察都不知道，现场其实还有一名便衣警察。

What Kenny and other police at the park don't know is that there's an undercover police officer there too.

他没穿制服。

He's not in uniform.

其他警察误把这名便衣警察当成了犯罪嫌疑人。

The other police mistake the undercover cop for the perpetrator of the crime.

他们把他抓住了。

They catch him.

他遭到残酷殴打。

And he was brutally assaulted.

当时凯尼·康利就在几米外跑过，却声称自己完全没注意到这场暴力事件，因为他一心追着自以为的嫌疑人，根本没看见旁边发生了什么。

This happened just meters away from Kenny Conley as he was running past, and he claimed that he didn't notice this crime occurring because he was so focused on pursuing who he thought the suspect was that he didn't see this happening at all.

凯尼·康利对几米外发生的事毫无察觉。

Kenny Conley completely misses what's happening meters away from him.

很多人对凯尼·康利的说法表示怀疑，但美国的研究人员克里斯·查布雷带领团队做了一项实验，试图还原凯尼·康利案的场景。

Now a lot of people doubted this claim that Kenny Conley gave, but researchers in The United States led by Chris Chabre, they actually conducted a study where they tried to simulate the conditions of the Kenny Conley case.

他们让参与者到公园里完成一个计数任务——沿着小路跑步，数前面有人摸自己头的次数。

So they had participants who they took to this park and they had them complete a counting task that, you know, they were running along a path, counting the number of times someone in front of them touched their head.

就是一个简单的任务。

So just a basic task.

他们模拟了类似凯尼·康利案中发生的暴力行为，就在小路旁边，结果发现大约一半的人根本没注意到这场袭击。

And they simulated the the assault off the path like what happened in Kenny Conley's case, and they found that around 50% of people didn't notice the crime.

所以当他们复现了肯尼·康利案件中的已知事实后，他所说的看起来非常合理。

So when they replicated the known facts of Kenny Conley's case, it seemed like a highly plausible thing that he was claiming.

此后也有研究证实，当你让参与者完成某种任务时，比如数数或者紧盯场景中的某个特定目标，

There's been research since then that does show that, you know, when you're you get your participants to complete some kind of task, like they might be counting something or watching for something specific in a scene.

他们可能会完全忽略盗窃、暴力袭击这类事情的发生。

They might fail to notice a theft or a physical assault or something like that.

为什么有些人注意到了，而有些人却没注意到呢？

What is it that makes some people notice and other people not?

这纯粹是实验条件带来的随机结果，还是某些人本身就有某种特质？

Is it just random chance based on how the experiment runs, or is it something intrinsic to some people?

要预测一个人是否会注意到犯罪行为，非常困难。

It is very hard to find good predictors of whether someone would notice a crime or not.

更可能影响结果的，是环境因素，而不是个人特质。

If anything, it seems to be more contextual things that will affect whether someone notices a crime or not.

比如，他们对任务的专注程度有多高，任务本身有多难，因为我们的注意力资源是有限的。

So things like how absorbed are they in the task that they're doing, how hard is the task that they're doing, because our attention is a very finite resource.

如果我们把大量注意力都放在手头的任务上，就没多少余力去留意那些与任务无关的意外情况了。

So if we're devoting a lot of attention to a task, we've got less capacity for noticing something unexpected that doesn't fit with the task that we're doing.

任务越难，我们越容易错过周围发生的事。

So the harder the task, the more likely we are to fail to notice something.

比如醉酒，酒精浓度很高确实会让人更难注意到犯罪行为，但更重要的还是这些情境因素。

Things like alcohol intoxication, you know, high levels of alcohol intoxication could make someone less likely to notice something like a crime, but it seems to be more these situational factors.

海莉·卡伦说，认识到这种奇特现象的存在很重要，因为它影响着法庭上对目击者的看法。

Recognising that this strange phenomenon exists is important, Hayley Cullen says, because it influences how eyewitnesses are seen in a courtroom.

人们普遍认为，如果犯罪就在眼前发生，没人会看不见——这种偏见太根深蒂固了，一旦有人没看到，大家就不信任他。

A bias towards thinking that someone would notice a crime happening right in front of them is so strong that when they don't, we don't trust that person.

如果他们出庭作证，我们的实验室研究，以及其他人的发现也表明，他们可能不被采信，因为人们普遍觉得，遇到意外或危险的事，没人会注意不到。所以一旦有人说没看见，别人就很难相信。

If they do give testimony, what our research shows in our lab, but what others are finding as well, is that they might not be believed because this intuition around we see unexpected and dangerous things is so strong that if someone claims that they didn't see it, they might not be believed.

在肯尼·康利的案子中，他上庭时声称自己没看到那场袭击，结果却被判伪证和妨碍司法公正，部分原因就是人们根本不信他的话。

In Kenny Conley's case, what happened was that when he went to trial and made claims that he didn't notice this assault, he was actually convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice, partially on the basis that people just didn't believe that his claim could be true.

他被关了将近三年才被无罪释放，仅仅因为他说自己没看到那场犯罪，就付出了这么沉重的代价。

And he spent close to three years in prison before he was exonerated, so, yeah, it was quite serious implications for him just based on this claim that he didn't see the the crime.

我们的大脑居然会这样，听起来确实很奇怪，但海莉说，这种注意力盲视其实是正常且健康的。

It does seem totally bizarre that our brains would do this, but Hayley says inattentional blindness is normal and healthy.

能够专注于手头的任务，同时忽略掉无关的干扰，这其实是我们的视觉系统一个非常有用的特点。

So it's actually a very productive feature of our visual system to be able to focus on a particular task that we're doing and ignore a relevant distraction.

大多数时候，这种现象其实是有好处的，比如你正在写作业，没听见有人叫你名字，或者有人在你面前拼命挥手，能这样专心反而有帮助。

So for the most part, when we experience this, it could be, you know, we're completing homework and we don't hear someone calling our name or, waving frantically in front of us, that's actually productive to be able to stay focused in that way.

只有当没注意到的东西后果严重时——比如没看见犯罪，或者开车时没留意到一个意想不到的危险——这种情况才可能带来严重后果，但这类情况其实非常罕见。

It's when the thing that we fail to see is really consequential, like a crime, or when we're driving if we don't see a particular hazard we're not expecting, that it's in those very rare circumstances where it can have really serious consequences.

除了注意力盲视，另一个导致目击者没注意到现场情况的因素，是‘模糊犯罪’这个概念。

Along with inattentional blindness, another factor that means an eyewitness might not clock what's going on is the idea of ambiguous crime.

海莉曾经写过一个例子，就是谢丽尔·格里默的案子。

An example of this, which Hayley has written about, is the case of Cheryl Grimmer.

谢丽尔·格里默的故事真的很令人惋惜。

Cheryl Grimmer's story is a really unfortunate one.

这事得回溯到上世纪七十年代。

So this is going back to the nineteen seventies.

切丽尔·格里默是个小女孩，有一天在沃朗贡的仙子沙滩上突然消失了，那天不过是再普通不过的一个夏日。

Cheryl Grimmer was a young girl who disappeared from Fairy Meadow Beach in Wollongong just on a, you know, an ordinary summer's day.

直到今天，已经过去了大约五十年，切丽尔还是下落不明。

And still to this day, Cheryl hasn't been found some, you know, fifty years later.

这个案子多年来一直是个冷案，但最近几年，BBC推出了一档关于切丽尔失踪的播客。

This case was a, you know, a bit of a cold case for many years, but in recent years, the BBC actually put out a podcast about Cheryl's disappearance.

听了这档播客之后，有好几个人站出来，说他们那天就在海滩上，或者觉得自己掌握了一些可能帮助重启调查和法律程序的线索。

And on the back of hearing that podcast, there are a number of people who have since come forward who are at the beach that day or believe they have useful information that might actually contribute to reopening the case and and legal proceedings.

这里让人担心的是，尤其是其中一位目击者，他说自己记得那天在海滩上，看到切丽尔和一个年轻男子在一起，但他当时根本没当回事，因为孩子当时只是像平常一样大喊大叫。

What the concern is here is that for for particularly for one of these witnesses, they said that they they remember being at the beach that day, they saw Cheryl with a young man, but they didn't really think anything of it because she was just screaming like children do.

对吧？

Right?

就算是父母在场，孩子也时不时会尖叫。

You know, even with parents, they scream sometimes.

直到听了BBC的播客，他才开始意识到，自己可能掌握着非常关键的信息，应该向警方提供。

And so it wasn't until hearing the BBC podcast that they really started to think that maybe they actually have really important information they need to to provide to authorities.

但这实际上意味着，他们当时并没有把这件事当成犯罪，直到五十年后的今天，才开始重新审视自己当年看到的情景。

What this basically means though is that they didn't interpret this event as a crime initially, and fifty years later, they're starting to reevaluate what they saw.

记忆消退得很快，所以一个人在事件发生五十年后，经过重新解读才提供的证词，到底有多可靠，这方面其实很少有研究能说明这会对证据质量产生什么影响。

Memory decays quite rapidly, and so whether we can actually rely on the statement that someone's giving fifty years after an event when they've reinterpreted the experience is something that there's actually not really a lot of research about how that might impact the quality of the evidence that they give.

你刚才其实已经隐约提到了，说到绑架是一种模糊的犯罪，这具体指的是什么？

And you've kind of alluded to it there and mentioned it, but kidnapping as an ambiguous crime, what does that mean?

‘模糊的犯罪’这个词，是我刚开始研究目击者记忆时，自己提出来的概念。

Ambiguous crime is a term that when I was first starting out as a researcher in eyewitness memory, I was looking into this.

我当时是不得不自己创造这个词。

I kind of had to create it as a term.

我说它模糊，是因为有些绑架案，我们脑子里有某种‘图式’——也就是对事件如何发展的典型预期。

But what what I meant in saying it's ambiguous is that some kidnappings you know, we have what we call schemas, which are event representations, like how we typically expect an event is going to unfold.

比如你去电影院，你心里很清楚：先买爆米花，找座位，放预告片，电影开始，片尾字幕，灯光熄灭。

Now, when you go to the movies, you kinda know you're gonna go get your popcorn, you sit down, there are your previews, the movie starts, there's credits, it goes dark.

你对整个流程有一个非常清晰的心理画面。

You've got this very clear mental representation of how that event will unfold.

我们对犯罪也有类似的刻板印象。

We have those with crimes as well.

说到绑架，我觉得如果让听众仔细想想，他们一听到‘绑架’，大概就会想到一个陌生人靠近孩子，孩子大喊大叫、踢打挣扎，绑匪一把拖进车里，开车跑掉。

And with kidnapping, I think, you know, if we get the audience to think about it, when they hear kidnapping, they probably think stranger comes up to child, child makes a fuss, kicks and screams, kidnapper pulls them into their van, drives off.

但我们脑子里这种画面，可能和绑架实际发生的情况完全不同。

But it it that mental representation we have might be very different to how kidnapping actually occurs.

有些绑架案里，孩子是自愿跟着陌生人走的，全程没有明显吵闹，这就意味着，当时发生的时候，我们根本意识不到这其实是一起犯罪。

So kidnappings sometimes happen where a child willingly goes with a stranger without obvious fuss, and that means that it could be the type of event that when it's happening, we don't realize that it's actually a crime in that instance.

这种最初的误解会影响我们对事件的记忆，因为我们一开始并不觉得这是犯罪，而只是当成一件普通的日常小事。

That could impact the way that we remember it because of that initial perception is not that it's a crime, but it could just be an ordinary day to day event.

你做过一些实验，测试目击者对绑架事件的反应。

And you've done some experiments that test kind of eyewitness reactions to to kidnappings.

你做了什么？发现了什么？

What did you do and and what did you find?

是的。

Yeah.

这是我很早以前当荣誉学生的时候的事了，那时候我刚作为心理学学生开展第一个研究项目。

So this was this was way back when I was an honors student, so when I was doing my research my first research project as a psychology student.

这个研究其实受到威廉·特里尔案件的启发，根据报道，威廉那天穿着蜘蛛侠服装，本该非常显眼才对。

And it was driven by it was actually inspired by the William Tyrrell case where, you know, from from the reports, we know that William Tyrrell was in, you know, Spider Man costume, and so he should have been someone who really stood out on the day he went missing.

但没人能提供他失踪当天的任何线索。

But nobody has been able to give information about his whereabouts on that day.

也许是因为，如果威廉真是被绑架了，整个过程看起来却像一件再普通不过的事。

Maybe it's because if William was abducted or kidnapped, maybe it just came across like an ordinary event.

所以我们做了一个研究，再次招募了一些参与者。

So we ran this study where we had, again, participants.

他们并不知道这项研究的真实目的。

They didn't know what the study was about.

他们看了一段视频，内容是有个小女孩坐车来到公交站。

They saw a video of a bus stop where a little girl arrives by car at the bus stop.

她坐下后，一位年长的女性走过来和她聊了几句，而在某些视频版本里，我们改了结局。

She goes and sits down, and eventually, an older woman comes up to her, has a conversation with her, and in some of the video versions, we we change the ending.

在一个版本里，画面就停在女孩和那位年长女性聊天的时候。

So in one version, the scene just ends while the girl and the older woman are talking to one another.

根本没有发生任何犯罪行为。

There's no crime that happens.

另一个版本里，那位女士给了小女孩一根巧克力棒，然后两人牵着手离开了。

In another version, the the lady offers the little girl a chocolate bar and they leave holding hands.

这属于我们所说的模糊性绑架。

And it's what we would consider an ambiguous kidnapping.

画面里没有出现典型的挣扎迹象，如果你看到这一幕，可能根本不会觉得这是犯罪。

It it doesn't show the typical signs of struggle, and if you if you see it, you might not interpret it as a as a crime.

第三个版本里，视频以所谓的明确犯罪场景收尾。

Then in the third version, the video ends with what they call the unambiguous crime.

那位女士站起来，拽着女孩的手臂把她拖走，小女孩大声呼救。

Where the the lady gets up, she pulls the girl's arm and drags her, and the little girl calls out for help.

我得说明一下，我们的参与者都戴着耳机，他们以为自己只是在听音乐，等公交车来。

And I should say our participants have headphones on, so they just they think they're listening to their music, they're waiting for their bus to arrive.

在那个明确的绑架版本里，观众能清楚地听到女孩在音频里尖叫。

So in that unambiguous kidnapping version, the one they can actually hear the girl screaming over the audio.

我们让参与者回顾他们看过的视频，问他们有没有发现什么异常，以此来了解他们对这个事件的理解。

What we did was we asked our participants whether they noticed anything strange about that the video that they saw so that we could get a sense of what their interpretation of the event was.

有趣的是，我们刚开始做这个研究时发现，那些看到明确犯罪画面——也就是尖叫、拖拽——的参与者中，大约有一半根本没觉得那是犯罪。

Interestingly, what we found when we first ran this study was that about half of the participants who were shown the video with the unambiguous crime, you know, the kick the the screaming and and dragging did not interpret it as a crime.

他们说：‘我没觉得看到什么像犯罪的事。’

They said, you know, didn't think I saw anything like a crime.

但原因在于，参与者看视频时，我们要求他们数一数有多少辆公交车经过公交站。

The reason for that though was while participants were watching this video, we told them that they needed to be, you know, counting the number of buses that passed the bus stop.

就像我之前说的，他们的注意力被分散了，没太关注视频里那个女人和女孩之间发生的事。

So like I said before, their their attention was kind of being taken away from what was actually happening in the video in the with the the lady and the girl.

这让我们意识到，当人们分心或忙于日常事务时，即使是很明显的事，比如绑架，也可能被忽略或误判。

So what it suggested to us is that when people are distracted or focusing on their day to day tasks, even things that are seemingly obvious might not be interpreted as crimes, like abduction or kidnapping.

海莉说，这可能会改变未来这类实验的设计方式，也会影响我们对目击者如何理解所见事件的认识。

Hayley says that could change the way these kinds of experiments are done in the future and what we understand about how eyewitnesses make sense of what they see.

很多研究者，包括目击证人研究领域的，都默认我们能注意到犯罪行为，所以在实验里，他们觉得没必要隐藏研究的真实目的。

A lot of researchers, even eyewitness researchers, I think, just made the assumption that we notice crimes, and so our in our experiments, we don't have to worry about disguising what we're researching.

他们只需要让人看犯罪视频，然后回忆看到了什么就行了。

We can just ask people to watch our crime video and tell us what they remember.

但我觉得这恰恰说明，至少在某些研究中，我们可能高估了人们的记忆力，因为我们假设他们注意到了所有细节，而我的研究显示，人们其实可能根本没注意到犯罪，甚至压根不觉得那是犯罪。

But I think it just goes to show that at least, you know, some of the research, we might actually be overestimating what people remember because we're making assumptions about what they saw when my research is showing that we might miss things about a crime and we might not interpret things to be crimes in the first place.

就像我们一开始聊到的，这个问题的后果非常严重。

As we talked about right at the top of the episode, the stakes are high here.

目击证人的证词在司法系统中是关键证据，能直接决定一个人是否被定罪。

Eyewitness testimony is a powerful piece of evidence in the justice system, and it can make or break convictions.

如果我们能更清楚地理解目击者的记忆机制，就能减少冤假错案，这对整个社会都有好处。

If we can better understand eyewitness memory, we can reduce instances of wrongful convictions, which I think benefits society at large.

它也能帮助那些因为认错人而自责的证人减轻心理负担。

You know, it benefits witnesses who are, you know, might feel guilty about making a mistake in identification.

它还能拯救无辜的人，让他们免于被错误定罪。

It benefits, you know, innocent people who are saved from a wrongful conviction.

这对社会也有好处，因为一旦有人被冤枉入狱，真正的罪犯往往还会继续作案，给整个社会带来危险。

It benefits society because when a person's wrongfully convicted, often that means that the guilty person continues to commit crimes and that puts society at large in danger.

另一方面，对于某些类型的犯罪，记忆证据至关重要。

On the other end, think, you know, for certain types of crimes, memory evidence is so crucial.

有时候这甚至是唯一的证据，导致很难把真正的罪犯定罪。

It might be the only thing and it means it's very hard to secure genuine convictions.

比如在家庭暴力案件中，我们常常只能依赖证人证词。

So in cases of domestic and family violence, for example, we're often relying on testimonial evidence.

我也认为，我们必须深入了解这些情境下目击者记忆的运作机制，才能确保真正需要正义的人得到公正对待。

And I also think it's important to make sure that we understand eyewitness memory or how memory works in these contexts so we can make sure that there is justice for those who need it most.

所以，这两方面我都很关注。

So it's, you know, both ends I'm really focused on.

如果我们既能防止冤假错案，又能确保真正有罪的人被绳之以法，那我们的司法体系就会变得更加完善。

If we can prevent wrongful convictions and we can make sure we're securing genuine convictions, then ultimately, I think we've got, you know, an even better legal system.

这位是麦考瑞大学心理科学学院的海莉·卡伦博士。

That is doctor Hayley Cullen, who is a lecturer in the School of Psychological Sciences at Macquarie University.

您刚才还听到了悉尼大学法律心理学副教授范戈尔德博士的分享。

And you also heard from doctor van Golde, who's an associate professor in legal psychology at the University of Sydney.

感谢制作人罗斯·科尔和本周的高级制作人兼记者詹姆斯·布伦南。

Thanks to producer Rose Kerr and senior producer and reporter this week, James Bullen.

如果您对法医心理学有任何疑问，比如关于记忆、犯罪心理画像或测谎，也许是您在电视上看到过、想知道是不是真的那些事。

If you have any questions about forensic psychology you want answered, about memory, criminal profiling, lie detection, Maybe it's something you've seen on TV and you're wondering if it's true.

欢迎给我们发邮件。

Send us an email.

我很想听听您对这个系列的看法。

I'd love to know what you think of the series.

您可以通过 allinthemind@abc.net.au 找到我。

You can reach me on allinthemind@abc.net.au.

我是萨娜·卡达尔。

I'm Sana Qadar.

感谢收听。

Thanks for listening.

下次再聊。

I'll catch you next time.

您正在收听的是ABC播客。

You've been listening to an ABC podcast.

更多精彩的ABC播客、直播电台和独家内容，请下载ABC Listen应用探索。

Discover more great ABC podcasts, live radio, and exclusives on the ABC Listen app.