An analysis of multiple choices in MSL lineups, and a comparison with simultaneous and sequential ones

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 273-285

  Levi, A M ^a  

^a NONE   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744998116     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160500238782     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ashbaugh, D. (1999). Quantitative and qualitative friction reach analysis. London: CRC Press.
2. Conners, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N., & McEwen, T. (1996). Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial. Washington: US Department of Justice.
3. Cutler, B. L., & Fisher, R. P. (1990). Live lineups, videotaped lineups, and photoarrays. Forensic Reports, 3, 439-448.
4. Corey, D., Malpass, R. S., & McQuiston, D. E. (1999). Parallelism in eyewitness and mock witness identifications. Cognitive Psychology, 13, S41-S58.
5. Ellis, H. D., Shepherd, J. W., Flin, R. H., Shepherd, J., & Davies, G. M. (1989). Identification from a computer-driven retrieval system compared with a traditional mug-shot album search: A new tool for police investigations. Ergonomics, 32, 167-177.
6. Juslin, P., Olsson, N., & Winman, A. (1996). Calibration and diagnostically of confidence in eyewitness identification: Comments on what can be inferred from the low confidence-accuracy correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1304-1316.
7. Kassin, S. M., Ellsworth, P., & Smith, V. L. (1989). The 'general acceptance' of psychological research on eyewitness testimony. American Psychologist, 44, 1089-1098.
8. Kemp, R. I., Pike, G. E., & Bruce, N. A. (2001). Video-based identification procedures: Combining best practice and practical requirements when designing identification systems. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 802-807.
9. Levi, A. M. (1998a). Are defendants guilty if they were chosen in a lineup? Law and Human Behavior, 22, 389-407.
10. Levi, A. M. (1998b). Protecting innocent defendants, nailing the guilty: a modified sequential lineup. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 265-275.
11. Levi, A. M. (2002). Up to forty: Lineup size, the modified sequential lineup, and the sequential lineup. Cognitive Technology, 7, 39-46.
12. Levi, A. M., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Issues concerning policy recommendations: the example of lineups and photospreads psychology. Public Policy, & Law, 7, 776-790.
13. Levi, A. M., & Wimesberg, Y. (in press). Adding voice to the lineup and the confidence-accuracy relationship. Tests using the MSL lineup. Cognitive Technology.
14. Lindsay, D. S., Read, J. D., & Sharma, K. (1998). Accuracy and confidence in person identification: The relationship is strong when witnessing conditions vary widely (as they do across real world witnesses). Psychological Science, 9, 215-218.
15. Lindsay, R. C.L. (1999). Applying applied research: Selling the sequential lineup. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 219-225.
16. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Bellinger, K. (1999). Alternatives to the sequential lineup: The importance of controlling the pictures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 315-321.
17. Lindsay, R. C. L., Lea, J. A., & Fulford, J. A. (1991). Sequential lineup presentation: Technique matters. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 741-745.
18. Lindsay, R. C. L., Nosworthy, G. J., Martin, R., & Martynuck, C. (1994). Finding suspects in mugshots. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 121-130.
19. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
20. Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1991). Eyewitness identification and the selection of distractors for lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 43-57.
21. Memon, A., & Bartlett, J. (2002). The effects of verbalization on face recognition in young and older adults. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 635-650.
22. Memon, A., & Gabbert, F. (2003). Unravelling the effects of sequential presentation in culprit-present lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 703-714.
23. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 549-570.
24. Pryke, S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Dysart, J. E., & Dupuis, P. (2004). Multiple independent identification decisions: A method of calibrating eyewitness identifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 73-84.
25. Sporer, S., Penrod, S. D., Read, D., & Cutler, B. L. (1995). Gaining confidence in confidence: A new meta-analysis on the confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 315-327.
26. Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 459-474.
27. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
28. The State of Israel v. Kdoshim, Tel Aviv District Court 40371 (1999).
29. The State of Israel v. Nachmias. Rechovot Court 4865 (2000).
30. Valentine, T., & Heaton, P. (1999). An evaluation of the fairness of police lineups and video identifications. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S59-S72.
31. Wogalter, M. S., Malpass, R. S., & Burger, M. A. (1993). How police officers construct lineups: A national survey. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA.
32. Wells, G. L. (1984). The psychology of lineup identifications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 89-103.
33. Wells, G. L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification? American Psychologist, 48, 553-571.
34. Wells, G. L., Rydell, S. M., & Seelau, E. (1993). The selection of distracters for eyewitness lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 835-844.
35. Yuille, J. C., & Cutshall, J. L. (1984). Live vs. video media in eyewitness events and lineups. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.