Narrative plausibility: the impact of sequence and anchoring

The perceived plausibility of suspect narratives is hypothesized to be a product of more than logical evaluation. Aspects of the narrative's internal structure, notably the extent to which it follows a canonical (or stereotypical) sequence of events, may influence judged plausibility. Plausibility may also be sensitive to external "anchors" that activate relevant schema. To test these possibilities, variations of two suspect testimonies were created in accordance with the model by Stein and Glenn (1979) of a stereotypical story grammar, and the account by Wagenaar, van Koppen, and Crombag (1993) of narrative anchoring. Subjects rated the narrative account using a perceived plausibility scale developed from pilot work. ANOVA revealed that criminal anchoring in suspect statements, regardless of the crime scenario, has a negative effect on the plausibility level. Similarly, plausibility levels were lower when the statement did not follow a temporal sequence of events. The implications for models of how people judge plausibility are discussed, as are the practical implications for legal contexts.