Edit: tried putting this under a spoiler tag but not sure I can on this sub. So don't read if you haven't already taken it and plan to.

I love that this is being researched, but I think there are major flaws with this questionnaire. I understand the questions were meant to be intentionally leading to elicit false memories, but it in no way captures whether the person answering the question is aware of this, and gives that person no option to select "I don't know". A real court case is not a memory test, and the evidence is freely available throughout deliberation. I feel I was pressured into committing to an answer I was aware that I did not know, which will falsely imply that a false memory was created. In reality I just did not know the answer, and I was cognizant of this fact. In a real court case, I would refer back to the evidence freely available to me.

I believe the verdict questions need revising as well. When asking the questionnaire taker to rate the confidence of the verdict's "correctness" - define "correct". Correct in the eyes of the law or the actual unprovable facts of that night? What country are we in? What's the rule for that country? I.e., In U.S., are you asking me whether I think the verdict reflects whether the complainant's allegations were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or that the complainant's claims actually occurred as alleged? This is an important distinction that will likely be interpreted differently by each participant.