Radical alternatives to traditional lineups

The Handbook of Eyewitness Psychology: Volume II: Memory for People

Volumn 2, Issue , 2007, Pages 179-200

  Dupuis, Paul R ^a   Lindsay, R L ^a  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67649938826     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203936368-14     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Bala, N., Lee, K., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Talwar, V. (2001). A legal & psychological critique of the present approach to the assessment of the competence of child witnesses. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 38, 409-451.
2. Bruck, M., Ceci, S. J., & Hembrooke, H. (1998). Reliability and credibility of young children’s reports. American Psychologist, 53, 136-151.
3. Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness selection: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 281-290.
4. Dysart, J. E., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). A pre-identification questioning effect: Serendipitously increasing correct rejections. Law & Human Behavior, 25, 155-165.
5. Goldstein, A. G., Chance, J. E., & Schneller, G. R. (1989). Frequency of eyewitness identification in criminal cases: A survey of prosecutors. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 71-74.
6. Gray, E. (1993). Unequal Justice: The prosecution of child sexual abuse. New York: Macmillan.
7. Honts, C. R. (1994). Assessing children’s credibility: Scientific and legal issues in 1994. North Dakota Law Review, 70, 879-899.
8. Levi, A. M. (1998). Protecting innocent defendants, nailing the guilty: A modified sequential lineup. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 265-275.
9. Levi, A. M. (2002). Up to forty: Lineup size, the modified sequential lineup, and the sequential lineup. Cognitive Technology, 7, 39-46.
10. Lindsay, R. C. L. (1999). Applying applied research: Selling the sequential lineup. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 219-225.
11. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Bellinger, K. (1999). Alternatives to the sequential lineup: The importance of controlling the pictures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 315-321.
12. Lindsay, R. C. L., Brigham, J. C., Malpass, R. S., & Ross, D. F. (2003, July). Cross-race identification from simultaneous and sequential lineups. Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Aberdeen, Scotland.
13. Lindsay, R. C. L., Lea, J. A., & Fulford, J. A. (1991). Sequential lineup presentation: Technique matters. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 741-745.
14. Lindsay, R. C. L., Lea, J. A., Nosworthy, G. J., Fulford, J. A., Hector, J., LeVan, V., et al. (1991). Biased lineups: Sequential presentation reduces the problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 796-802.
15. Lindsay, R. C. L., Pozzulo, J. D., Craig, W., Lee, K., & Corber, S. (1997). Simultaneous lineups, sequential lineups, and showups: Eyewitness selection decisions of adults and children. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 391-404.
16. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wallbridge, H., & Drennan, D. (1987). Do clothes make the man?: An exploration of the effect of lineup attire on eyewitness selection accuracy. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 19, 463-478.
17. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1980). What price justice? Exploring the relationship of lineup fairness to identification accuracy. Law & Human Behavior, 4, 303-313.
18. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness selection from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
19. Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification. Lineup instructions & the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 343-350.
20. Malpass, R. S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1999). Measuring lineup fairness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(S1), S1-S7.
21. Parker, J. F., & Ryan, V. (1993). An attempt to reduce guessing behavior in children’s and adult’s eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 11-26.
22. Phillips, M. R., McAuliff, B. D., Kovera, M. B., & Cutler, B. L. (1999). Double-blind photoarray administration as a safeguard against investigator bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 940-951.
23. Pozzulo, J. D. & Lindsay, R.C.L. (1995, June). Eyewitness identification procedures when appearance has been changed. Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Vancouver.
24. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1997). Conducting identifications with children: What not to do. Expert Evidence, 5, 126-132.
25. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A meta-analysis. Law & Human Behavior, 22, 549-570.
26. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1999). Elimination lineups: An improved selection procedure for child eyewitnesses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 167-176.
27. Pryke, S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Dysart, J., & Dupuis, P. (2004). Multiple independent selection decisions: A method of calibrating eyewitness selections. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 73-84.
28. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139-156.
29. Smith, S. M., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Pryke, S. (2000). Postdictors of eyewitness errors: Can false identifications be diagnosed? Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 542-550.
30. Sporer, S. L. (1993). Eyewitness selection accuracy, confidence, and decision timesin simultaneous and sequential lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 22-33.
31. Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law & Human Behavior, 21, 283-297.
32. Steblay, N. M., 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, 459-473.
33. Wells, G. L. (1984). The psychology of lineup selections. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 89-103.
34. Wells, G. L. (2005). Lineup theory. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology: Vol. II. Memory for people. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Wells, G. L., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1980). On estimating the diagnosticity of eyewitness non selections. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 776-784.
36. Wells, G. L., Malpass, R. S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Fisher, R. P., Turtle, J. W., & Fulero, S. (2000). Eyewitness research: The long road to national guidelines. American Psychologist, 55, 581-598.
37. Wells, G. L., Rydell, S. M., & Seelau, E. P. (1993). On the selection of distractors for eyewitness lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 835-844.
38. Wells, G. L., & Turtle, J. W. (1986). Eyewitness identification: The importance of lineup models. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 320-329.
39. Yarmey, A. D., & Morris, S. (1998). The effects of discussion on eyewitness memory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1637-1648.