Eyewitness testimony by adults with autism spectrum disorder

Eyewitness testimony is central to the Criminal Justice System (CJS), and this often includes the testimony of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). A number of risk factors suggest that people with ASD are at greater danger of victimisation, meaning that their 1% prevalence in the general population is likely to be over-inflated in the CJS. In addition to this, they have well-documented memory difficulties, yet scarcely any research has examined how they fare as eyewitnesses. My PhD research explored this issue. I examined the effectiveness of one of the most widely accepted police interviewing techniques, the Cognitive Interview (CI), for use with adults with ASD. One of the main components of the CI, context reinstatement, encourages the witness to relive the event mentally by focusing on contextual details such as the sights, sounds, smells etc. I found that the CI failed to aid the recall of witnesses with ASD, and actually reduced their accuracy. My subsequent work suggests that it is the mental time travel required by context reinstatement that individuals with ASD find difficult: when they were physically back in the same room in which the event was witnessed, their recall improved. These findings have important implications for investigative interviewing procedures with witnesses with ASD.
In the fellowship year I intend to re-examine these findings from a different perspective. The coding system used in my PhD work coded details as correct or incorrect, but did not explicitly examine whether these details were reported in the correct order. This is essential if police investigators are to understand the chain of events as they unfolded, and could mean the difference between whether the chief suspect left the scene before or after the attack was carried out. Therefore the first aim of the proposed work is to examine how well individuals with ASD recall the chronological order of events details; previous research suggests that they have difficulty with this. However if this is the case, there may be appropriate supportive interview strategies which can help - an area which subsequent research proposals developed during the fellowship would address. Secondly, in my PhD work, none of the to-be-remembered events were ones in which the witness was an active participant. Previous work suggests that individuals with ASD find it harder to recall events in which they were actively engaged then events which they passively observed. Again if this is the case it has immediate forensic implications, and would provide a focus for more substantial funding applications to develop appropriate supportive interviewing strategies.
This work will constitute two papers. During this fellowship year I intend to publish a third paper reviewing research on eyewitness testimony in ASD. This is very novel work and a review paper would disseminate findings further and generate new interest. The fellowship year would also enable me to develop both new research skills and proposals which would establish a more substantial program of work in the area, including the development of effective interview strategies, which in the case of context reinstatement might involve more supported procedures such as revisiting the scene where the event was witnessed or using photographs as a context aid. I would also like to extend my current work to the wider autism spectrum from high-functioning adults to children and those with intellectual impairment.
This work should be of interest to a wide audience, from individuals with ASD themselves, the police and other legal officials, policy makers, and academics. Findings may also have implications for the educational sector in terms of effective learning strategies in school. The fellowship will allow me the opportunity I need to improve my publication track record and apply for longer-term funding which I hope will allow me to develop an academic career in this important but under-researched area.