Mugshot exposure effects: Retroactive interference, mugshot commitment, source confusion, and unconscious transference

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 287-307

  Deffenbacher, Kenneth A ^a   Bornstein, Brian H ^b   Penrod, Steven D ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^c JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Mugshots; Photobiased lineups; Retroactive interference; Source confusion; Unconscious transference

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BYSTANDER EFFECT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFUSION; HUMAN; MEMORY; META ANALYSIS; PHOTOGRAPHY; RECALL BIAS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TRANSFERENCE; WITNESS;

CONFUSION; CULTURE; HUMANS; PORTRAITS; TIME FACTORS; TRANSFERENCE (PSYCHOLOGY); UNCONSCIOUS (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33747592626     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-006-9008-1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bartlett, J. C., & Fulton, A. (1991). Familiarity and recognition of faces: The factor of age. Memory & Cognition, 19, 229-238.
2. *Brigham, J. C., & Cairns, D. (1988). The effect of mugshot inspections on eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1393-1410.
3. *Brown, E. L., Deffenbacher, K. A., & Sturgill, W. (1977). Memory for faces and the circumstances of encounter. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 311-318.
4. Clark, S. E. (2005). A re-examination of the effects of biased lineup instructions in eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 575-604.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. *Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987). The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 233-258.
7. *Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & O'Rourke, T. E. (1986). Unconfounding the effects of contextual cues on eyewitness identification accuracy. Social Behaviour, 1, 113-134.
8. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
9. *Davies, G., Shepherd, J., & Ellis, H. (1979). Effects of interpolated mugshot exposure on accuracy of eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 232-237.
10. 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.
11. *Deffenbacher, K. A., Carr, T. H., & Leu, J. R. (1981). Memory for words, pictures, and faces: Retroactive interference, forgetting, and reminiscence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 299-305.
12. *Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hammond, R., & Dupuis, P. (2001). Mugshot exposure prior to lineup identification: Interference, transference, and commitment effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1280-1284.
13. *Gorenstein, G. W., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1980). Effect of choosing an incorrect photograph on a later identification by an eyewitness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 616-622.
14. Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C., Brown, J., & Jasechko, J. (1989). Becoming famous overnight: Limits on the ability to avoid unconscious influences of the past. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 326-338.
15. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
16. Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85.
17. Kassin, S. M., Tubb, V. A., Hosch, H. M., & Memon, A. (2001). On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
18. *Lindsay, R. C. L., Nosworthy, G. J., Martin, R., & Martynuck, C. (1994). Using mug shots to find suspects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 121-130.
19. *Loftus, E. F. (1976). Unconscious transference in eyewitness identification. Law and Psychology Review, 2, 93-98.
20. Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87, 252-271.
21. *Memon, A., Hope, L., Bartlett, J., & Bull, R. (2002). Eyewitness recognition errors: The effects of mugshot viewing and choosing in young and old adults. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1219-1227.
22. *Perfect, T. J., & Harris, L. J. (2003). Adult age differences in unconscious transference: Source confusion or identity blending? Memory & Cognition, 31, 570-580.
23. *Read, J. D., Tollestrup, P., Hammersley, R., McFadzen, E., & Christensen, A. (1990). The unconscious transference effect: Are innocent bystanders ever misidentified? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 3-31.
24. Reisberg, D., & Heuer, F. (2006). The influence of emotion on memory in forensic settings. In M. P. Toglia, J. D. Read, D. F. Ross, & Lindsay, R. C. L. (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology: Memory for events (Vol. 1). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Roediger, H. L. (1990). Implicit memory: Retention without remembering. American Psychologist, 45, 1043-1056.
26. Rosenthal, R. (1995). Writing meta-analytic reviews. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 183-192.
27. *Ross, D. F., Ceci, S. J., Dunning, D., & Toglia, M. P. (1994). Unconscious transference and mistaken identity: When a witness misidentifies a familiar but innocent person. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 918-930.
28. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. D. (1986). A meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139-156.
29. Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 (1968).
30. Steblay, N. M. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 413-424.
31. Williams, G. (1963). The proof of guilt. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
32. Wise, R. A., & Safer, M. A. (2004). What U.S. judges know and believe about eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 427-443.