The participants were undergraduate psychology majors at Rider University. They received extra class credit for participating. In the first experiment, 50 participants generated or rated lists of typical items a person could buy in a convenience store. This information was used in the second experiment. In the second experiment, 283 participants read a summary of a convenience store robbery and the subsequent trial that contained conflicting testimony from two eyewitnesses. The testimony of the eyewitnesses varied with respect to whether the detail was typical, atypical, or absent. The study participants then answered a series of questions regarding the credibility, honesty, and quality of the memory of both eyewitnesses and made judgments about the defendant's guilt. Results revealed that the presence of detail generally affected the jurors' ratings of the witnesses. When one witness provided atypical or typical detail and the opposing witness provided no detail, the jurors' assessments of the witness who provided details were enhanced. Findings indicated that the mention of details in testimony can influence mock jurors' ratings of a witness's believability. Table, notes, and 15 references (Author abstract modified)