Basic and applied issues in eyewitness research: A Münsterberg centennial retrospective

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 733-736

  Bornstein, Brian H ^a   Meissner, Christian A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPLIED RESEARCH; BASIC RESEARCH; COURT; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; CRIMINAL LAW; CRIMINOLOGY; EDITORIAL; EPISODIC MEMORY; EXPERT WITNESS; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; RECOGNITION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EID: 53849127901     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1478     Document Type: Editorial

References (22)

1. Banaji, M. R., & Crowder, R. G. (1989). The bankruptcy of everyday memory. American Psychologist, 44, 1185-1193.
2. Benjamin, L. T. (2006). Hugo Münsterberg's attack on the application of scientific psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 414-425.
3. Benton, T. R., McDonnell, S., Ross, D. F., Thomas, N., & Bradshaw, E. (2007). Has eyewitness research penetrated the American legal system? In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. 2: Memory for people (pp. 453-500). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Bull, R. (1999). Police investigative interviewing. In A. Memon, & R. Bull (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of interviewing (pp. 279-292). Chichester. UK: John Wiley & Sons.
5. Clark, S. E. (2003). A memory and decision model for eyewitness identification. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 629-654.
6. Clark, S. E., & Davey, S. L. (2005). The target-to-foils shift if simultaneous and sequential lineups. Law & Human Behavior, 29, 151-172.
7. Gronlund, S. D. (2004). Sequential lineups: Shift in criterion or decision strategy? Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 362-368.
8. Gronlund, S. D. (2005). Sequential lineup advantage: Contributions of distinctiveness and recollection. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 23-37.
9. 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.
10. Malpass, R. S. (2006). A policy evaluation of simultaneous and sequential lineups. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 12, 394-418.
11. McQuiston-Surrett, D. E., Malpass, R. S., & Tredoux, C. G. (2006). Sequential vs. simultaneous lineups: A review of methods, data, and theory. Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 12, 137-169.
12. 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 & Cognition, 33, 783-792.
13. Monahan, J., & Walker, L. (2005). Social science in law (5th ed.). Westbury, NY: Foundation Press.
14. Münsterberg, H. (1898). The danger from experimental psychology. Atlantic Monthly, 81, 159-167.
15. Münsterberg, H. (1908). On the witness stand. New York: Doubleday.
16. Neisser, U. (1978). Memory: What are the important questions? In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 3-24). London: Academic Press.
17. Neisser, U. (1991). A case of misplaced nostalgia. American Psychologist, 46, 34-36.
18. Penrod, S. D., & Bornstein, B. H. (2007). Generalizing eyewitness reliability research. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. 2: Memory for people (pp. 529-556). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
20. Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2002). Eyewitness identification: Information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 155-167.
21. Wiener, R. L., Hackney, A., Kadela, K., Rauch, S., Seib, H., Warren, L., et al. (2002). The fit and implementation of sexual harassment law to workplace evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 747-764.
22. Wigmore, J. H. (1909). Professor Münsterberg and the psychology of evidence. Illinois Law Review, 3, 399-445.