Post-identification feedback: Exploring the effects of sequential photospreads and eyewitnesses' awareness of the identification task

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 20, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 991-1007

  Douglass, Amy Bradfield ^a   McQuiston Surrett, Dawn ^b  

^a BATES COLLEGE   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MEMORY CONSOLIDATION; NORMAL HUMAN; PHOTOGRAPHY; POST HOC ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; VIDEOTAPE; VISUAL MEMORY; WITNESS;

EID: 33845652144     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1253     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Bradfield, A., & McQuiston, D. E. (2004). When does evidence of eyewitness confidence inflation affect judgments in a criminal trial? Law and Human Behavior, 28, 369-388.
2. Bradfield, A. L., & Wells, G. L. (2000). The perceived validity of eyewitness identification testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 581-594.
3. Bradfield, A. L., Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2002). The damaging effect of confirming feedback on the relation between eyewitness certainty and identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 112-120.
4. Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 281-290.
5. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
6. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1998). Jury decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41-56.
7. Ellis, H. D., Shepherd, J. W., Flin, R. H., & Davies, G. M. (1989). Identification from a computer-driven retrieval system compared with a traditional mug-shot album search: A new tool for police investigation, Ergonomics, 32, 167-177.
8. Garrioch, L., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (200 1). Lineup administrators' expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 299-315.
9. Hennepin County Attorney. (2003). Police and prosecutors team up for better eyewitness IDs. Retrieved January 1, 2006, from www.hennepinattomey.org.
10. Jacoby, L. L. (1984). Incidental versus intentional retrieval: Remembering and awareness as separate issues. In L. R. Squire, & N. Butters (Eds.), The neuropsychology ofmemory. New York: Guildford.
11. 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.
12. Kolata, G., & Peterson, I. (2001). New Jersey is trying new way for witnesses to say, 'It's Him'. New York Times. Retrieved January 1, 2006, from http://www.nytimes.com.
13. Levi, A. M., Jungman, N., Ginton, A., Aperman, A., & Noble, G. (1995). Using similarity judgments to conduct a mugshot album search. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 649-661.
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. Psychological Science, 9,215-218.
15. 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.
16. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & Rumpel, C. M. (1981). Can people detect eyewitness-identification accuracy within and across situations? Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 79-99.
17. Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1994). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 714-724.
18. Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1991). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482-489.
19. McFadden, R. D. (2003). DNA clears rape convict after 12 years. New York Times. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com
20. Meissner, C. A., Tredoux, C. G., Parker, J. F., & MacLin, O. H. (2005). Eyewitness decisions in simultaneous and sequential lineups: A dual-process signal detection theory analysis. Memory and Cognition, 33, 783-792.
21. Memon, A., & Bruce, V. (1983). The effects of encoding strategy and context change on face recognition. Human Learning, 2, 313-326.
22. Migueles, M., & Garcia-Bajos, E. (1999). Recall, recognition, and confidence patterns in eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 257-268.
23. Murray, D. M., & Wells, G. L. (1982). Does knowledge that a crime was staged affect eyewitness performance? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 42-53.
24. Neil v. Biggers. (1972). 409 US 188.
25. Neuschatz, J. S., Preston, E. L., Burkett, A. D., Toglia, M. R, Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., Fairless, A. H., Lawson, D. S., Powers, R. A., & Goodsell, C. A. (2005). The effects of post-identification feedback and age on retrospective eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 435-453.
26. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
27. Roediger, H. L., III, Weldon, M. S., Stadler, M. L., & Riegler, G. L. (1992). Direct comparison of two implicit memory tests: Word fragment and word stem completion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 1251-1269.
28. Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2001). Actual Innocence: When justice goes wrong and how to make it right. New York: Signet.
29. Semmler, C., Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2004). Effects of postidentification feedback on eyewitness identification and nonidentification confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 334-346.
30. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139-156.
31. Shaw, J. S., III, Kerr, T. K., & Woythaler, K. A. (2001). Public eyewitness confidence ratings can differ from those held privately. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 141-154.
32. Sporer, S., Penrod, S., Read, D., & Cutler, B. L. (1995). Choosing, confidence, and accuracy: A meta-analysis of the confidence-accuracy relation in eyewitness identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 315-327.
33. 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.
34. 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. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. U.S. Department of Justice. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement (NCJ Publication No. 178240). Washington, DC: Author.
36. Valentine, T., Pickering, A., & Darting, S. (2003). Characteristics of eyewitness identification that predict the outcome of real lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 969-993.
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. (1984). The psychology of lineup identifications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 89-103.
39. Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1998). "Good, you identified the suspect:" Feedback to eye-witnesses distorts their reports of the witnessing experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 360-376.
40. Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1999). Distortions in eyewitnesses' recollections: Can the postidentification feedback effect be moderated? Psychological Science, 10, 138-144.
41. Wells, G. L., Ferguson, T. J., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1981). The tractability of eyewitness confidence and its implications for triers of fact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 688-696.
42. Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Ferguson, T. J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, andjuror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440-448.
43. Wells, G. L., Malpass, R. S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Fisher, R. R, Turtle, J. W., & Fulero, S. M. (2000). From the lab to the police station: A successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist, 55, 581-598.
44. Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2002). Eyewitness identification information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 155-167.
45. Wells, G. L., Olson, E. A., & Charman, S. D. (2003). Distorted retrospective eyewitness reports as functions of feedback and delay. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 42-52.
46. Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M., & Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 603-647.
47. Wogalter, M. S., Malpass, R. S., & McQuiston, D. E. (2004). A national survey of U. S. police on preparation and conduct of identification lineups. Psychology, Clime, and Law, 10, 69-82.
48. Yarmey, A. D. (2004). Eyewitness recall and photo identification: A field experiment. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 10, 53-68.