Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 31-50

  Brewer, Neil ^a   Caon, Alita ^a   Todd, Chelsea ^a   Weber, Nathan ^a  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Eyewitness identification; Identification accuracy latency relationship; Identification latency

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LATENT PERIOD; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; OFFENDER; PREDICTION; RECOGNITION; RELIABILITY; RESEARCH; RESPONSE TIME; STIMULUS RESPONSE; WITNESS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRIMINAL LAW; FACE; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; VIDEORECORDING;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CRIMINAL LAW; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VIDEOTAPE RECORDING;

EID: 33746438192     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-006-9002-7     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Atkinson, R. C., & Juola, J. F. (1974). Search and decision processes in recognition memory. In D. H. Krantz, R. C. Atkinson, R. D. Luce, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology: Vol. 1. Learning, memory and thinking (pp. 243-293). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
2. Brewer, N., Gordon, M., & Bond, N. (2000). Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategy. Psychology, Crime & Law, 6, 21-32.
3. Brewer, N., Weber, N., & Semmler, C. (2005). Eyewitness identification. In N. Brewer, & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 177-221). New York: Guilford.
4. Brewer, N., Weber, N., & Semmler, C. (in press). A role for theory in eyewitness identification research. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology: Volume 2: Memory for people. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Dunning, D., & Perretta, S. (2002). Automaticity and eyewitness accuracy: A 10- to 12-second rule for distinguishing accurate from inaccurate positive identifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 951-962.
6. Dunning, D., & Stern, L. B. (1994). Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate eyewitness identifications via inquiries about decision processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 818-835.
7. Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1-67.
8. Kahana, M., & Loftus, G. (1999). Response time versus accuracy in human memory. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of cognition (pp. 323-384). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1980). What price justice? Exploring the relationship of lineup fairness to identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 303-313.
10. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
11. Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482-489.
12. Metcalfe, J. (1996). Metacognitive processes. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Memory handbook of perception and cognition (Vol. 10, pp. 381-407). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
13. Murdock, B. B. (1985). An analysis of the strength-latency relationship. Memory and Cognition, 13, 511-521.
14. Murdock, B. B., & Dufty, P.O. (1972). Strength theory and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 284-290.
15. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108.
16. Smith, S. M., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Pryke, S. (2000). Postdictors of eyewitness errors: Can false identifications be diagnosed? Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 542-550.
17. Smith, S. M., Lindsay, R. C. L., Pryke, S., & Dysart, J. E. (2001). Postdictors of eyewitness errors: Can false identifications be diagnosed in the cross-race situation? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 153-169.
18. Sporer, S. L. (1992). Post-dicting eyewitness accuracy: Confidence, decision-times and person descriptions of choosers and nonchoosers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 157-180.
19. Sporer, S. L. (1993). Eyewitness identification accuracy, confidence, and decision times in simultaneous and sequential lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 22-33.
20. Sporer, S. L. (1994). Decision times and eyewitness identification accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 300-327). New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
22. Treisman, A., & Gormican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15-48.
23. Van Zandt, T. (2000). ROC curves and confidence judgments in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 582-600.
24. Weber, N., Brewer, N., Wells, G. L., Semmler, C., & Keast, A. (2004). Eyewitness identification and response latency: The unruly 10-12 second rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 139-147.
25. Wells, G. L., Leippe, M. R., & Ostrom, T. M. (1979). Guidelines for empirically assessing the fairness of a lineup. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 285-293.