CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 482-505

  Davis, John P ^a   Valentine, Tim ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COURT; CRIME; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IDENTITY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE QUALITY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMULATION; TELEVISION; VIDEORECORDING;

EID: 67651151447     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1490     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Attorney General's Reference. [No.2 of 2002], (2003). 1 Cr. App. R. 321, England.
2. Bonner, L., Burton, A. M., & Bruce, V. (2003). Getting to know you: How we learn new faces. Visual Cognition, 10, 527-536. DOI: 10.1080/13506280244000168
3. Brewer, N. (2006). Uses and abuses of eyewitness identification confidence. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 3-23. DOI: 10.1348/135532505X79672
4. Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Greenwood, K., Hancock, P. J. B., Burton, A. M., & Miller, P. (1999). Verification of face identities from images captured on video. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 339-360.
5. Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Newman, C., & Burton, A. M. (2001). Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 207-218.
6. Burton, A. M., Wilson, S., Cowan, M., & Bruce, V. (1999). Face recognition in poor-quality video: Evidence from security surveillance. Psychological Science, 10, 243-248. DOI:10.1111/1467-9280.00144
7. Charman, S. D., & Wells, G. L. (2007). Eyewitness lineups: Is the appearance-change instruction a good idea? Law and Human Behavior, 7, 3-22. DOI:10.1007/s10979-006-9006-3
8. Christie, F., & Bruce, V. (1998). The role of dynamic information in the recognition of unfamiliar faces. Memory and Cognition, 26, 780-790.
9. Clutterbuck, R., & Johnston, R. A. (2005). Demonstrating how unfamiliar faces become familiar using a face matching task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 97-116. DOI: 10.1080/ 09541440340000439
10. Cutler, B. L., Berman, G. L., Penrod, S. D., & Fisher, R. P. (1994). Conceptual, practical and empirical issues associated with eyewitness identification test media. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 163-181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1995). Mistaken identification: The eyewitness, psychology and the law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Davies, G. M., & Thasen, S. (2000). Closed-circuit television: How effective an identification aid? British Journal of Psychology, 91, 411-426.
13. Davis, J. P. (2007). The forensic identification of CCTV images of unfamiliar faces. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Goldsmiths, University of London.
14. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 622-727.
15. Diamond, R., & Carey, S. (1977). Developmental changes in the representation of faces. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 23, 1-22.
16. Donaldson, W. (1992). Measuring recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 275-277.
17. Ellis, H. D., Shepherd, J. W., & Davies, G. M. (1979). Identification of familiar and unfamiliar faces from internal and external features: Some implications for theories of face recognition. Perception, 8, 431-439. DOI:10.1068/p080431
18. Gill, M., & Loveday, K. (2003). What do offenders think about CCTV? In M. Gill (Ed.), CCTV (pp. 81-91). Leicester: Perpetuity Press.
19. Halberstein, R. A. (2001). The application of anthropometric indices in forensic photography: Three case studies. Journal of Forensic Science, 46, 1438-1441. http://journalsip.astm.org/JOURNALS/ FORENSIC/PAGES/3791.htm
20. Henderson, Z., Bruce, V., & Burton, A. M. (2001). Matching the faces of robbers captured on video. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15, 445-464. DOI: 10.1002/acp.718
21. Hockley, W. E., Hemsworth, D. H., & Consoli, A. (1999). Shades of the mirror effect: Recognition of faces with and without sunglasses. Memory and Cognition, 27, 128-138.
22. Home Office. (2007). National CCTV Strategy. London: Home Office.
23. Kemp, R., Towell, N., & Pike, G. (1997). When seeing should not be believing: Photographs, credit cards and fraud. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 211-222. DOI: 10.1002/ACP.430
24. Knight, B., & Johnston, A. (1997). The role of movement in face recognition. Visual Cognition, 4, 265-273. DOI: 10.1080/713756764
25. Lander, K., Bruce, V., & Hill, H. (2001). Evaluating the effectiveness of pixelation and blurring on masking the identity of familiar faces. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15, 101-116. DOI: 10.1002/1099-0720(200101/02)15:1<101::AID.-ACP697>3.0.CO;2-7
26. Lander, K., & Chuang, L. (2005). Why are moving faces easier to recognize? Visual Cognition, 12, 429-442. DOI: 10.1080/ 13506280444000382
27. Mardia, K. V., Coombs, A., Kirkbride, J., Linney, A., & Bowie, J. L. (1996). On statistical problems with face identification from photographs. Journal of Applied Statistics, 23, 655-676. DOI: 10.1080/02664769624008
28. MacLeod, M. D., Frowley, J. N., & Shepherd, J.W. (1994). Whole body information: Its relevance to eyewitnesses. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 125-143). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Megreya, A. M., & Burton, A. M. (2006). Unfamiliar faces are no faces: Evidence from a matching task. Memory & Cognition, 34, 865-876.
30. Megreya, A. M., & Burton, A. M. (2007). Hits and false positives in face matching: A familiarity-based dissociation. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1175-1184.
31. Metzger, M. M. (2001). Which transformations of stimuli are the most disruptive to facial recognition? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92, 517-526. DOI: 10.2466/PMS.92.2.517-526
32. Norris, C., McCahill, M., & Wood, D. (2004). Editorial. The growth of CCTV: A global perspective on the international diffusion of video surveillance in publicly accessible space. Surveillance & Society, 2, 110-135. http://www.surveillance-and-society.org /articles2(2)/editorial.pdf
33. O'Donnell, C., & Bruce, V. (2001). Familiarisation with faces selectively enhances sensitivity to changes made to the eyes. Perception, 30, 755-764. DOI:10.1068/p3027
34. Police and Criminal Evidence Act. (1984). (s.60(1)(a), s.60(1) and s.66(1)) Codes of Practice (2008). http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/ operational-policing/powers-pace-codes/pace-code-intro/
35. Phillips, P. J., Scruggs, W. T., O'Toole, A. J., Flynn, P. J., Bowyer, K. W., Schott, C. L., & Sharpe, M. (2007). FRVT 2006 and ICE 2006 large-scale results. Retrieved 15 April 2007 from http://iris.nist.gov/ ice/FRVT2006andICE2006LargeScaleReport.pdf
36. Porter, G., & Doran, G. (2000). An anatomical and photographic technique for forensic facial identification. Forensic Science International, 114, 97-105. DOI:10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00290-5
37. R v Gray. (2003). EWCA Crim. 1001.
38. Rattner, A. (1988). Convicted but innocent: Wrongful conviction and the criminal justice system. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 283-293. DOI: 10.1007/BF01044385
39. Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2000). Actual innocence: Five days to execution and other dispatches from the wrongly convicted. New York: Doubleday.
40. Schiff, W., Banka, L., & de Bordes Galdi, G. D. (1986). Recognising people seen in events via dynamic "mug shots". American Journal of Psychology, 99, 219-231.
41. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139-156. DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.100.2.139
42. Smith v The Queen. (2001). HCA 50, Australia.
43. Sporer, S. L., Penrod, S., Read, D., & Cutler, B. (1995). Choosing, confidence and accuracy: A meta-analysis of the confidence-accuracy relation in eyewitness identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 315-327.
44. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice. Programs.
45. Terry, R. L. (1994). Effects of facial transformations on accuracy of recognition. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 483-492.
46. Valentine, T. (1988). Upside-down faces: A review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 471-491.
47. Washington Post. (8 October 2005). Security camera new witness. Retrieved 10 October 2005 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-yn/ content/article2005/10/07/AR2005100701895
48. Wells, G. L., Memon, A., & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Eyewitness evidence: Improving its probative value. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 45-75. DOI:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006. 00027.x
49. Wells, G. L., Olson, E., & Charman, S. (2002). Eyewitness identification confidence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 151-154. DOI:10.1111/1467-8721.00189
50. Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., Malpass, R. S., Fulero, S. M., & Brinacombe, C. A. E. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 603-647. DOI: 10.1023/A:1025750605807
51. Young, A. W., Hay, D. C., McWeeny, K. H., Flude, B. M., & Ellis, A. W. (1985). Matching familiar and unfamiliar faces on internal and external features. Perception, 14, 737-746. DOI:10.1068/p140737