The influence of suspect ethnicity and evidence direction on alibi credibility assessment

Nir Rozmann, Galit Nahari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations


We investigated whether evidence direction (incriminating versus exonerating) moderated the influence of intergroup bias on alibi credibility assessments. Israeli-Jewish participants (n = 160) assessed the credibility of an alibi statement provided by either an Israeli-Jewish or an Israeli-Arab suspect. Along with the alibi statement, half of the participants were presented with incriminating evidence, while the other half were presented with exonerating evidence. The results indicated that evidence direction influenced credibility assessment regarding both in-group and out-group suspects. Specifically, under incriminating evidence, Israeli-Jewish suspects were perceived as more deceptive than Israeli-Arab suspects, whereas under exonerating evidence, no such differences were found. These results emphasize the significance of group bias in assessing the credibility of alibi statements.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1516-1521
Number of pages6
JournalApplied Cognitive Psychology
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1 Nov 2020

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


  • alibi
  • credibility assessment
  • evidence direction
  • intergroup bias
  • social identity theory
  • suspect ethnicity


Dive into the research topics of 'The influence of suspect ethnicity and evidence direction on alibi credibility assessment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this