Abstract
In two studies, we examined if correct and incorrect statements in eyewitness testimony differed in semantic content. Testimony statements were obtained from participants who watched staged crime films and were interviewed as eyewitnesses. We analyzed the latent semantic representations of these statements using LSA and BERT. Study 1 showed that the semantic space of correct statements differed from incorrect statements; correct statements were more closely related to a dominance semantic representation, whereas incorrect statements were more closely related to a communion semantic representation. Study 2 only partially replicated these findings, but a mega-analysis of the two datasets showed different semantic representations for correct and incorrect statements, with incorrect statements more closely related to representations of communion and abstractness. Given the critical role of eyewitness testimony in the legal context, and the generally low ability of fact-finders to estimate the accuracy of witness statements, our results strongly call for further research on semantic content in correct and incorrect testimony statements.