Eyewitness identification tests

Legal and Criminological Psychology

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 77-96

  Brewer, Neil ^a   Palmer, Matthew A ^a  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEMORY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOANALYSIS; REVIEW; VICTIM; WITNESS;

EID: 74749090227     PISSN: 13553259     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135532509X414765     Document Type: Review

References (99)

1. Beal, C. R., Schmitt, K. L., & Dekle, D. F. (1995). Eyewitness identification of children: Effects of absolute judgements, nonverbal responses options, and event encoding. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 197-216.
2. Bradfield, A. L., & Wells, G. L. (2000). The perceived validity of eyewitness identification testimony: A test of the five Biggers criteria. 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. Brewer, N. (2006). Uses and abuses of eyewitness identification confidence. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 3-23.
5. Brewer, N., & Burke, A. (2002). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 353-364.
6. Brewer, N., Caon, A., Todd, C., & Weber, N. (2006). Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 31-50.
7. Brewer, N., Gordon, M., & Bond, N. (2000). Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategy. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 6, 21-32.
8. Brewer, N., Keast, A., & Sauer, J. D. (2009). Children's eyewitness identification performance: Effects of a Not Sure response option and accuracy motivation. Legal and Criminological Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1348/135532509X474822.
9. Brewer, N., &Weber, N. (2008). Eyewitness confidence and latency: Indices of memory processes not just markers of accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 827-840.
10. Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2006). The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: Effects of lineup instructions, foil similarity and target-absent base rates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 11-30.
11. Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2009). Obtaining and interpreting eyewitness identification test evidence: The influence of police-citizen interactions. In T. Williamson, R. Bull, & T. Valentine (Eds.), Handbook of psychology of investigative interviewing: Current developments and future directions (pp. 205-220). Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
12. Brown, E. L., Deffenbacher, K. A., & Sturgill,W. (1977). Memory for faces and the circumstances of encounter. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 311-318.
13. Carlson, C. A., Gronlund, S. D., & Clark, S. E. (2008). Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 118-128.
14. Clark, S. E. (2005). A re-examination of the effects of biased lineup instructions in eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 395-424.
15. Cutler, B. L., Berman, G. L., Penrod, S., & 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). New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Cutler, B. L., & Fisher, R. P. (1990). Live lineups, videotaped lineups, and photoarrays. Forensic Reports, 3, 439-448.
17. Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1995). Mistaken identification: The eyewitness, psychology, and the law. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987). The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 233-258.
19. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., O'Rourke, T. E., & Martens, T. K. (1986). Unconfounding the effects of contextual cues on eyewitness identification accuracy. Social Behavior, 1, 113-134.
20. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Jury decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41-56.
21. Davies, G., Stevenson-Robb, Y., & Flin, R. (1988). Tales out of school: Children's memory for an unexpected event. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues (pp. 122-127). Chichester: Wiley.
22. Davies, G., Tarrant, A., & Flin, R. (1989). Close encounters of the witness kind: Children's memory for a simulated health inspection. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 415-429.
23. Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Mugshot exposure effects: Retroactive interference, mugshot commitment, source confusion, and unconscious transference. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 287-307.
24. Deffenbacher, K. A., Carr, T. H., & Leu, J. R. (1981). Memory for words, pictures, and faces: Retroactive interference, forgetting, and reminiscence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 299-305.
25. Douglass, A. B., Brewer, N., & Semmler, C. (2009). Moderators of post-identification feedback effects on eyewitnesses' memory reports. Legal and Criminological Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1348/135532509X446337
26. Douglass, A. B., & Steblay, N. M. (2006). Memory distortion in eyewitnesses: A meta-analysis of the post-identification feedback effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 859-869.
27. Dunning, D., & Perretta, S. (2002). Automaticity and eyewitness accuracy: A 10- to 12-second rule for distinguishing accurate from inaccurate positive identifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 951-962.
28. Dysart, J. E., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2007). Show-up identifications: Suggestive technique or reliable method? In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness memory: Memory for people (Vol. 2, pp. 137-153). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hammond, R., & Dupuis, P. (2001). Mug shot exposure prior to lineup identification: Interference, transference, and commitment effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1280-1284.
30. Egan, D., Pittner, M., & Goldstein, A. G. (1977). Eyewitness identification: Photograph vs. live models. Law and Human Behavior, 1, 199-206.
31. Ellison, K. W., & Buckhout, R. (1981). Psychology and criminal justice. New York: Harper and Row.
32. Flowe, H. D., & Ebbesen, E. B. (2007). The effect of lineup member similarity on recognition accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 33-52.
33. Garrioch, L., & Brimacombe, C. (2001). Lineup administrators' expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 299-314.
34. Gonzalez, R., Ellsworth, P. C., & Pembroke, M. (1993). Response biases in lineups and showups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 525-537.
35. Greathouse, S. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2008). Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 70-82.
36. Hafstad, G. S., Memon, A., & Logie, R. (2004). Post-identification feedback, confidence and recollections of witnessing conditions in child witnesses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 901-912.
37. Haw, R. M., & Fisher, R. P. (2004). Effects of administrator-witness contact on eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1106-1112.
38. Innocence Project (2008). Innocence Project. Retrieved November 2008, from http://www.innocenceproject.org
39. Juslin, P., Olsson, N., & Winman, A. (1996). Calibration and diagnosticity of confidence in eyewitness identification: Comments on what can be inferred from the low confidenceaccuracy correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1304-1316.
40. Kassin, S. M., Tubb, V. A., Hosch, H. M., & Memon, A. (2001). On the 'general acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
41. Keast, A., Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2007). Children's metacognitive judgments in an eyewitness identification task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 97, 286-314.
42. Laughery, K. R., Alexander, J. F., & Lane, A. B. (1971). Recognition of human faces: Effects of target exposure time, target position, pose position and type of photograph. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 477-483.
43. Lindsay, D. S., Nilsen, E., & Read, J. D. (2000). Witnessing-condition heterogeneity and witnesses' versus investigators' confidence in the accuracy of witnesses' identification decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 685-697.
44. 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.
45. Lindsay, R. C. L., Mansour, J. K., Beaudry, J. L., Leach, A. M., & Bertrand, M. I. (2009). Sequential lineup presentation: Patterns and policy. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 14, 13-24.
46. Lindsay, R. C. L., Nosworthy, G. J., Martin, R., & Martynuck, C. (1994). Using mug shots to find suspects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 121-130.
47. Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1980). What price justice? Exploring the relationship of lineup fairness to identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 303-313.
48. 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.
49. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & O'Connor, F. J. (1989). Mock-juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 333-339.
50. Luus, C. A. E., & Wells, G. L. (1991). Eyewitness identification and the selection of distractors for lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 43-57.
51. Luus, C., & Wells, G. L. (1994). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 714-723.
52. Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482-489.
53. Malpass, R. S., Tredoux, C. G., & McQuiston-Surrett, D. (2009). Public policy and sequential lineups. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 14, 1-12.
54. McAllister, H. A., Stewart, H. A., & Loveland, J. (2003). Effects of mug book size and computerized pruning on the usefulness of dynamic mug book procedures. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 9, 265-278.
55. Meissner, C. A., Sporer, S. L., & Schooler, J.W. (2007). Person descriptions as eyewitness evidence. In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology: Memory for people (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. Morgan III, C. A., Hazlett, G., Doran, A., Garrett, S., Hoyt, G., Thomas, P., et al. (2004). Accuracy of eyewitness memory for persons encountered during exposure to highly intense stress. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 27, 265-279.
57. Nosworthy, G. J., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1990). Does nominal lineup size matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 358-361.
58. Palmer, M.A., Brewer, N., & Weber, N. (2009a). Eyewitness identification from multiple lineups: Effects of initial response and feedback. Manuscript submitted for publication.
59. Palmer, M.A., Brewer, N., & Weber, N. (2009b). Effects of disconfirming feedback on eyewitness identification responses to multiple lineups for different culprits. Manuscript in preparation.
60. Parker, J. F., & Carranza, L. E. (1989). Eyewitness testimony of children in target-present and target-absent lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 133-149.
61. Parker, J. F., & Ryan, V. (1993). An attempt to reduce guessing behavior in children's and adults' eyewitness identifications. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 11-26.
62. Perfect, T. J., & Harris, L. J. (2003). Adult age differences in unconscious transference: Source confusion or identity blending? Memory and Cognition, 31, 570-580.
63. Phillips, M. R., McAuliff, B. D., Kovera, M. B., & Cutler, B. L. (1999). Double-blind photoarray adminstration as a safeguard against investigator bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 940-951.
64. Pike, G., Brace, N., & Kynan, S. (2002). The visual identification of suspects: Procedures and practice. London: Home Office, (Briefing Note 2/02).
65. Potter, R., & Brewer, N. (1999). Perceptions of witness behaviour-accuracy relationships held by police, lawyers and jurors. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 6, 97-103.
66. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1997). Increasing correct identifications by children. Expert Evidence, 5, 126-132.
67. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A metaanalysis. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 549-570.
68. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1999). Elimination lineups: An improved identification procedure for child eyewitnesses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 167-176.
69. Pryke, S., Lindsay, R. C. L., Dysart, J. E., & Dupuis, P. R. (2004). Multiple independent identification decisions: A method of calibrating eyewitness identifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 73-84.
70. Sauer, J. D., Brewer, N., &Weber, N. (2008). Multiple confidence estimates as indices of eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 528-547.
71. Sauer, J. D., Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2008). Is there a magical time boundary for diagnosing eyewitness identification accuracy in sequential lineups? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 123-135.
72. Sauerland, M., & Sporer, S. (2009). Fast and confident: Postdicting eyewitness identification accuracy in a field study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 46-62.
73. 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.
74. Shepherd, J. W., Ellis, H. D., & Davies, G. M. (1982). Identification evidence. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
75. Sporer, S. L. (1992). Post-dicting eyewitness accuracy: Confidence, decision-times and person descriptions of choosers and non-choosers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 157-180.
76. Sporer, S. L. (1993). Eyewitness identification accuracy, confidence, and decision times in simultaneous and sequential lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 22-33.
77. Sporer, S. L. (1994). Decision times and eyewitness identification accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups. In D. F. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 300-327). New York: Cambridge University Press.
78. Sporer, S. L., Penrod, S. D., Read, J. 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.
79. Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 283-297.
80. 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.
81. Steblay, N. M., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: A meta-analytic review. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 523-540.
82. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
83. Tredoux, C. G. (2002). A direct measure of facial similarity and its relation to human similarity perceptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 180-193.
84. UK Home Office (2008). Police and criminal evidence act 1984: Code D.
85. Weber, N., Brewer, N., Wells, G. L., Semmler, C., & Keast, A. (2004). Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency: The unruly 10-12 second rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 139-147.
86. Wells, G. L. (1988). Eyewitness identification: A system handbook. Toronto, CA: Carswell Legal Publications.
87. Wells, G. L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification? American Psychologist, 48, 553-571.
88. Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1998). 'Good, you identified the suspect': Feedback to eyewitnesses distorts their reports of the witnessing experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 360-376.
89. Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1999). Eyewitnesses' recollections of their confidence, witnessing conditions, and identification decisions: The distorting effects of feedback. Psychological Science, 10, 138-144.
90. Wells, G. L., Leippe, M. R., & Ostrom, T. M. (1979). Guidelines for empirically assessing the fairness of a lineup. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 285-293.
91. Wells, G. L., Memon, A., & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Eyewitness evidence: Improving its probative value. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 45-75.
92. Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2002). Eyewitness identification: Information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 155-167.
93. 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.
94. Wells, G. L., Rydell, S. M., & Seelau, E. P. (1993). The selection of distractors for eyewitness lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 835-844.
95. 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, 22, 603-647.
96. Wells, G. L., & Turtle, J. (1986). Eyewitness identification: The importance of lineup models. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 320-329.
97. Wolgater, M. S., Marwitz, D. B., & Leonard, D. C. (1992). Suggestiveness in photospread lineups: Similarity induces distinctiveness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 443-453.
98. Wright, D. B. (2007). The impact of eyewitness identifications from simultaneous and sequential lineups. Memory, 15, 746-754.
99. Zajac, R., & Karageorge, A. (2009). The wildcard: A simple technique for improving children's target-absent lineup performance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 358-368.