Causal and associative hypotheses in psychology: Examples from eyewitness testimony research

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 190-213

  Wright, Daniel B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Association; Causation; Emotion; Eyewitness testimony; Own race bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747136652     PISSN: 10768971     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.12.2.190     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. Allen, M., Mabry, E., & McKelton, D.-M. (1998). Impact of juror attitudes about the death penalty on juror evaluations of guilt and punishment: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 715-731.
2. Banaji, M. R., & Crowder, R. G. (1989). The bankruptcy of everyday memory. American Psychologist, 44, 1185-1193.
3. Berger, V. W. (2005). Selection bias and covariate imbalances in randomized clinical trials. Chichester, England: Wiley.
4. Berry, W. D. (1993). Understanding regression assumptions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Brewer, W. F. (1988). Memory for randomly sampled autobiographical events. In U. Neisser & E. Winograd (Eds.), Remembering reconsidered: Ecological and traditional approaches to the study of memory (pp. 21-90). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6. Browne, W. J., Subramanian, S. V., Jones, K., & Goldstein, H. (2005). Variance partitioning in multilevel logistic models that exhibit over-dispersion. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A, 168, 599-613.
7. Burt, C. D. B. (1993). The effect of actual event duration and event memory on the reconstruction of duration information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, 63-73.
8. Burt, C. D. B. (1999). Categorisation of action speed and estimated event duration. Memory, 7, 345-355.
9. Burt, C. D. B., Mitchell, D. A., Raggatt, P. T. F., Jones, C. A., & Cowan, T. M. (1995). A snapshot of autobiographical memory retrieval characteristics. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 61-74.
10. Burt, C. D. B., & Popple, J. S. (1996). Effects of implied action speed on estimation of event duration. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 53-63.
11. Cattell, R. B. (1988). The principles of experimental design and analysis in relation to theory building. In J. R. Nesselroade & R. B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (2nd ed., pp. 21-67). London: Plenum Press.
12. Chiroro, P., & Valentine, T. (1995). An investigation of the contact hypothesis of the own race bias in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 48(A), 879-894.
13. Christianson, S.-Å., Loftus, E. F., Hoffman, H., & Loftus, G. R. (1991). Eye fixations and memory for emotional events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 693-701.
14. Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359.
15. Connors, 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. Alexandria, VA: National Institute of Justice.
16. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
17. Cronbach, L. J. (1.957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684.
18. Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127.
19. Culhane, S. E., & Hosch, H. M. (2005). Law enforcement officers serving as jurors: Guilty because charged? Psychology, Crime, and Law, 11, 305-313.
20. Dahir, V. B., Richardson, J. T., Ginsburg, G. P., Gatowski, S. I., Dobbin, S. A., & Merlino, M. L. (2005). Judicial application of Daubert to psychological syndrome and profile evidence: A research note. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 62-82.
21. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993).
22. Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., Penrod, S. D., & McGorty, E. K. (2004). A meta-analytic review of the effects of high stress on eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 687-706.
23. DeFries, J. C., & Fulker, D. W. (1985). Multiple regression analysis of twin data. Behavior Genetics, 15, 467-473.
24. Dixon, L., & Gill, B. (2002). Changes in the standards for admitting expert evidence in federal civil cases since the Daubert decision. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8, 251-308.
25. Engels, E. A., Schmidt, C. H., Terrin, N., Olkin, I., & Lau, J. (2000). Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: An empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Statistics in Medicine, 19, 1707-1728.
26. Faigman, D. L. (1995). The evidentiary status of social science under Daubert. Is it "scientific," "technical," or "other" knowledge? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1, 960-979.
27. Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. (1963). The Feynman lectures on physics: Mainly mechanics, radiation, and heat. Palo Alto, CA: Addison-Wesley.
28. Fienberg, S. E. (1971, January 22). Randomization and social affairs: The 1970 draft lottery. Science, 171, 255-261.
29. Fodor, J. A. (1991). You can fool some of the people all of the time, everything else being equal: Hedged laws and psychological explanations. Mind, 100, 19-34.
30. Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981). How direct is visual perception? Some reflections on Gibson's "ecological approach." Cognition, 9, 139-196.
31. Galton, F. (1879). Psychometric experiments. Brain, 2, 149-162.
32. Gordon, J. D. (1998). Admissibility of repressed memory evidence by therapists in sexual abuse cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 4, 1198-1225.
33. Gossett, W. [writing as "Student"]. (1931). The Lanarkshire milk experiment. Biometrika, 23, 398-406.
34. Groscup, J. L., Penrod, S. D., Studebaker, C. A., Huss, M. T., & O'Neil, K. M. (2002). The effects of Daubert on the admissibility of expert testimony in state and federal criminal cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8, 339-372.
35. Grove, W. M., & Barden, R. C. (1999). Protecting the integrity of the legal system: The admissibility of testimony from mental health experts under Daubert/Kumho analysis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 224-242.
36. Grove, W. M., & Meehl, P. E. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293-323.
37. Hand, D. J. (2004). Measurement theory and practice: The world through quantification. London: Edward Arnold.
38. Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. Naval Research Reviews, 9, 1-17.
39. Hinde, J., & Demétrio, C. G. B. (1998). Overdispersion: Models and estimation. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 27, 151-170.
40. Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945-960.
41. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Kassin, S. M., Ellsworth, P. C., & Smith, V. L. (1989). The "general acceptance" of psychological research on eyewitness testimony: A survey of the experts. American Psychologist, 44, 1089-1098.
43. Kassin, S. M., Tubb, V. A., Hosch, H. M., & Memon, A. (2001). On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
44. Krafka, C., Dunn, M. A., Johnson, M. T., Cecil, J. S., & Miletich, D. (2002). Judge and attorney experiences, practices, and concerns regarding expert testimony in federal civil trials. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8, 309-332.
45. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 119 S. Ct. 1.167 (1999).
46. Loftus, E, F. (1997, September). Creating false memories, Scientific American, 277(3), 70-75.
47. Loftus, E. F., Loftus, G. R., & Messo, J. (1987). Some facts about "weapon focus." Law and Human Behavior, 1.1, 55-62.
48. MacLin, O. H., & Malpass, R. S. (2001). Racial categorization of faces: The ambiguous race face effect. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 98-118.
49. Meehl, P. E. (1967). Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science, 34, 1.03-115.
50. Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 806-834.
51. Meehl, P. E., & Waller, N. G. (2002). The path analysis controversy: A new statistical approach to strong appraisal of verisimilitude. Psychological Methods, 7, 283-300.
52. Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 3-35.
53. Meissner, C. A., Brigham, J. C., & Butz, D. A. (2005). Memory for own- and other-race faces: A dual-process approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 545-567.
54. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.
55. Mitchell, K. J., Livosky, M., & Mather, M. (1998). The weapon focus effect revisited: The role of novelty. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 287-303.
56. Moffitt, T. E. (2005). The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment interplay in antisocial behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 533-554.
57. Ofshe, R., & Watters, E. (1995). Making monsters: False memories, psychotherapy, and sexual hysteria. London: André Deutsch.
58. Pedersen, A. I. C., & Wright, D. B. (2002). Do differences in event descriptions cause differences in duration estimates? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 769-783.
59. Pickel, K. L. (1999). The influence of context on the "weapon focus" effect. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 299-311.
60. Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.
61. Rosenfeld, B., & Lewis, C. (2005). Assessing violence risk in stalking cases: A regression tree approach. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 343-357.
62. Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 688-701.
63. Sanders, J., Diamond, S. S., & Vidmar, N. (2002). Legal perceptions of science and expert knowledge. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8, 139-153.
64. Sangrigoli, S., Pallier, C., Argenti, A.-M., Ventureyra, V. A. G., & de Schonen, S. (2005). Reversibility of the other-race effect in face recognition during childhood. Psychological Science, 16, 440-444.
65. Sankar, P., & Cho, M. K. (2002, November 15). Genetics: Toward a new vocabulary of human genetic variation. Science, 298, 1337-1338.
66. Saxe, L., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (1999). Admissibility of polygraph tests: The application of scientific standards past-Daubert. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 203-223.
67. Seelau, S. M., & Wells, G. L. (1995). Applied eyewitness research: The other mission. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 319-324.
68. Simon, H. A. (1954). Spurious correlation: A causal interpretation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 467-479.
69. Skowronski, J. J. (2005). In diversity there is strength: An autobiographical memory research sampler. Social Cognition, 23, 1-10.
70. Spearman, C. (1904). "General intelligence," objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201-293.
71. Steblay, N. M. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 413-424.
72. Steblay, N. M., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 523-540.
73. Swets, J. A., Dawes, R. M., & Monahan, J. (2000, October). Better decisions through science. Scientific American, 283(4), 82-87.
74. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department, of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
75. Thompson, B. (1996). AERA editorial policies regarding statistical significance testing: Three suggested reforms. Educational Researcher, 25(2), 26-30.
76. Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31(3), 24-31.
77. Tollestrup, P. A., Turtle, J. W., & Yuille, J. C. (1994). Actual victims and witnesses to robbery and fraud: An archival analysis. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 144-160). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
78. Valentine, T., Pickering, A., & Darling, S. (2003). Characteristics of eyewitness identification that predict the outcome of real lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 969-993.
79. Vrij, A. (2005). Criteria-based content analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 tudies. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 3-41.
80. Wainer, II. (1991). Adjusting for differential, base rates: Lord's paradox again. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 147-151.
81. Walker, P. M., & Hewstone, M. (in press). Intergroup experience and the own-race face effect: A case study. Applied Cognitive Psychology.
82. Weber, N., Brewer, N., Wells, G. L., Semmler, C., & Keast, A. (2004). Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency: The unruly 10-12-second rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 139-147.
83. Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness testimony research: System variables versus estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546-1557.
84. Wells, G. L., Malpass, R. S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Fisher, R. P., Turtle, J. W., & Fulero, S. (2000). From the lab to the police station: A successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist, 55, 581-598.
85. Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2003). Eyewitness identification. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 277-295.
86. Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus sampling in social psychological experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1115-1125.
87. Wickelgren, W. A. (1977). Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information-processing dynamics. Acta Psychologica, 41, 67-85.
88. Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604.
89. Wright, D. B. (2003). Making friends with your data: Improving how statistics are conducted and reported. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 123-136.
90. Wright, D. B., Boyd, C. E., & Tredoux, C. G. (2001). A field study of own-race bias in South Africa and England. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 119-133.
91. Wright, D. B., & McDaid, A. T. (1996). Comparing system and estimator variables using data from real line-ups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1.0, 75-84.