Can a lineup procedure designed for child witnesses work for adults? Comparing simultaneous, sequential, and elimination lineup procedures

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 2195-2209

  Pozzulo, Joanna D ^a   Dempsey, Julie ^a   Corey, Shevaun ^a   Girardi, Alberta ^a   Lawandi, Alex ^a   Aston, Cory ^a  

^a CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51249111730     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00387.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Behrman, B. W. Davey, S. L. (2001). Eyewitness identification in actual criminal cases: An archival analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 475 491.
2. Brandon, R. Davies, C. (1973). Wrongful imprisonment. London : Allen & Unwin.
3. Buckhout, R. (1974). Eyewitness testimony. Scientific American, 231, 23 31.
4. Clark, S. E. Davey, S. L. (2005). The target to foils shift in simultaneous and sequential lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 151 172.
5. Connors, E., Lundregan, T., Miller, N. McEwan, 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.
6. Cutler, B. Penrod, S. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 281 290.
7. Gronlund, S. D. (2004). Sequential lineups: Shift in criterion or decision strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 362 668.
8. Kolata, G. Peterson, I. (2001, July 21). New way to insure eyewitnesses can ID the right bad guy. New York Times. Retrieved May 26, 2008, from http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/gina_kolata/index. html?inline=nyt-per
9. Lieppe, M. R., Wells, G. L. Ostrom, T. M. (1978). Crime seriousness as a determinant of accuracy in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 345 351.
10. Lindsay, R. C. L., Lea, J. A. Fulford, J. A. (1991). Sequential lineup presentation: Technique matters. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 741 745.
11. Lindsay, R. C. L. Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 3, 556 564.
12. Maclin, O. H., Zimmerman, L. A. Malpass, R. S. (2005). PCEyewitness and the sequential superiority effect: Computer-based lineup administration. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 303 321.
13. Malpass, R. S. Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482 489.
14. McQuiston-Surrett, D., Malpass, R. S. Tredoux, C. G. (2006). Sequential vs. simultaneous lineups: A review of methods, data, and theory. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 12, 137 169.
15. Pozzulo, J. D. Balfour, J. (2006). The impact of change in appearance on children's eyewitness identification accuracy: Comparing simultaneous and elimination lineup procedures. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 25 34.
16. Pozzulo, J. D. Lindsay, R. C. L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 549 570.
17. Pozzulo, J.D. Lindsay, R. C. L. (1999). Elimination lineups: An improved identification procedure for child eyewitnesses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 167 176.
18. 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, 459 472.
19. Wells, G. L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification? American Psychologist, 14, 553 571.
20. Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R., Fulero, S. M. Brimacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603 647.
21. Yarmey, A. D. (1979). The psychology of eyewitness testimony. New York : Free Press.