A national survey of US police on preparation and conduct of identification lineups

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 69-82

  Wogalter, Michael S ^a   Malpass, Roy S ^b   Mcquiston, Dawn E ^b  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0842329046     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160410001641873     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Brigham, J. C. and Brandt, C. C. (1992). Measuring lineup fairness: mock witness responses versus direct evaluations of lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 475-489.
2. Brigham, J. C., Ready, D. J. and Spier, S. A. (1990). Standards for evaluating the fairness of photograph lineups. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 149-163.
3. Bruce, V. (1982). Changing faces: visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 73, 105-116.
4. Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N. and McEwan, T. (1996). Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish innocence after Trial. National Institute of Justice, Alexandria, VA.
5. Cutler, B. L. and Fisher, R. P. (1990). Live lineups, videotaped lineups, and photoarrays. Forensic Reports, 3, 439-449.
6. Egan, D., Pittner, M. and Goldstein, A. G. (1977). Eyewitness identification: photographs vs. live models. Law and Human Behavior, 1, 199-206.
7. Ellis, G. D., Shepherd, J. W. and Davies, G. M. (1980). The deterioration of verbal descriptions of faces over different delay intervals. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 8, 101-106.
8. Farmer, J. J. Jr (2001). Attorney General Guidelines for Preparing and Conducting Photo and Live Lineup Identification Procedures. 18 April 2001, New Jersey: Office of the Attorney General.
9. Kebbell, M. R. and Wagstaff, G. F. (1999). Face Value? Evaluating the Accuracy of Eyewitness Information. Police Research Paper 102, Home Office (UK), Policing and Reducing Crime Unit.
10. Koehnken, G., Malpass, R. S. and Wogalter, M. (1996). Forensic applications of lineup research. In S. Sporer, R. S. Malpass and G. Koehnken (Eds.), Psychological Issues in Eyewitness Identification (pp. 205-231). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Laughery, K. R. and Wogalter, M. S. (1989). Forensic applications of face research. In A. W. Young and H. D. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Face Processing (pp. 519-555). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science (North Holland).
12. Laughery, K. R., Duval, G. and Wogalter, M. S. (1986). Dynamics of face recall. In H. D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe and A. W. Young (Eds.), Aspects of Face Processing (pp. 373-387). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
13. Laughery, K. R., Jensen, D. G. and Wogalter, M. S. (1988). Response bias with prototypic faces. In M. M. Gruneberg, R. Sykes and P. Morris (Eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues (pp. 157-162). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
14. Lindsay, R. C. L. and Malpass R. S. (Eds.) (1999). Measuring lineup fairness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13 (Special Issue), S1-S124.
15. Lindsay, R. C. L. and Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
16. Lindsay, R. C., Pozzulo, J., Craig, W., Lee, L. and Corber, S. (1997). Simultaneous lineups, sequential lineups, and showups: eyewitness identification decisions of adults and children. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 391-404.
17. Luus, C. A. E. and Wells, G. L. (1991). Eyewitness identification and the selection of distractors for lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 43-57.
18. Malpass, R. S. and Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482-489.
19. Malpass, R. S. and Devine, P. G. (1983). Measuring the fairness of eyewitness identification lineups. In S. M. A. Lloyd-Bostock and B. R. Clifford (Eds.), Evaluating Witness Evidence (pp. 81-102). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
20. Malpass, R. S. and Devine, P. G. (1984). Research on suggestion in lineups and photo-spreads. In G. L. Wells and E. F. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness Testimony: Psychological Perspectives (pp. 64-91). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Marwitz, D. B. and Wogalter, M. S. (1988). Bias in photospreads of faces: a comparison of two lineup construction methods. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting (pp. 541-543). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
22. McAllister, H. A., Blair, M. J., Cerone, L. G. and Laurent, M. J. (2000). Multimedia Mug Books: How Multi Should the Media Be? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14 (3), 277-291.
23. National Police Chiefs and Sheriffs Information Bureau (1991). National Directory of Law Enforcement Administrators, Correctional Institutions, and Related Agencies. Stevens Point, WI.
24. Navon, D. (1990a). How critical is the accuracy of an eyewitness memory? Another look at the issue of lineup diagnosticity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 506-510.
25. Navon, D. (1990b). Ecological parameters do not equal non-lineup evidence: A reply to Wells and Luus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 517-520.
26. Navon, D. (1992). Selection of lineup foils by similarity to the suspect is likely to misfire. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 575-593.
27. Paley, B. and Geiselman, R. E. (1989). The effects of alternative photo-spread instructions on suspect identification performance. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 7, 3-13.
28. Pigott, M. A., Brigham, J. C. and Bothwell, R. K. (1990). A field study on the relationship between quality of eyewitnesses' descriptions and identification accuracy. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 17, 84-88.
29. Scheck, B., Neufeld, P. and Dwyer, J. (2001). Actual Innocence: When Justice Goes Wrong And How To Make It Right. New York: Signet.
30. Shepherd, J. W., Davies, G. M. and Ellis, H. D. (1978). How best shall a face be described? In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris and R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory. London: Academic Press.
31. Shepherd, J. W., Davies, G. M. and Ellis, H. D. (1981). Studies of cue saliency. In G. Davies, H. Ellis and J. Shepherd (Eds.), Perceiving and Remembering Faces (pp. 105-131). London: Academic Press.
32. Shepherd, J. W., Ellis, H. D. and Davies, G. M. (1982). Identification Evidence: a Psychological Evaluation. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
33. Steblay, S., Dysart, J., Fulero, S. and Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: a meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 459-473.
34. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence (1999). Eyewitness Evidence: a Guide for Law Enforcement. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. NCJ 178240.
35. Wagenaar, W. A. and Veefkind, N. (1992). Comparison of one-person and many-person lineups: a warning against unsafe practices. In F. Loesel, D. Bender and T. Bliesner (Eds.), Psychology and Law: International Perspectives (pp. 275-285). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
36. Wall, P. M. (1965). Eye-witness Identification in Criminal Cases. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
37. Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546-1557.
38. Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M. and Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 603-647.
39. Wells, G. L., Malpass, R. S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Fisher, R. P., Turtle, J. W. and Fulero, S. M. (2000). From the lab to the police station: a successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist, 55, 581-598.
40. Wogalter, M. S. and Jensen, D. G. (1986). Response bias in lineups with prototypic faces. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting (pp. 725-728). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
41. Wogalter, M. S. and Laughery, K. R. (1987). Face recognition: effects of study to test maintenance and change of photographic mode and pose. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1, 241-253.
42. Wogalter, M. S., van't Slot, L. J. and Kalsher, M. J. (1991). Bias in police lineups and its reduction an alternative construction procedure. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1561-1565). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
43. Wogalter, M. S., Cayard, J. A. and Jarrard, S. (1992a). Massed vs. distributed exposure and imaging of faces: changing the test view. Current Psychology: Research and Reviews, 10, 281-188.
44. Wogalter, M. S., Marwitz, D. B. and Leonard, D. C. (1992b). Suggestiveness in photospread line-ups: similarity induces distinctiveness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 443-453.
45. Wogalter, M. S., Malpass, R. S. and Burger, M. A. (1993a). How police officers construct lineups: a national survey. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 640-644). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
46. Wogalter, M. S., Burger, M. A. and Malpass, R. S. (1993b). Methods of constructing live and photographic lineups by police officers in the United States. In M. S. Wogalter (Chair), Forensic Applications of Face Recognition Research. Symposium Conducted at the International Conference on Face Processing, Cardiff, UK.
47. Yarmey, A. D., Yarmey, M. J. and Yarmey, A. L. (1996). Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in showups and lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 459-477.