Obtaining and Interpreting Eyewitness Identification Test Evidence: The Influence of Police-Witness Interactions

Handbook of Psychology of Investigative Interviewing: Current Developments and Future Directions

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 205-220

  Brewer, Neil ^a   Wells, Gary L ^b,c  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b Iowa State University   (United States)

^c Institute of Forensic Science and Public Policy   (United States)

Author keywords

Double blind administration and line up administrator influence; Expectations of witnesses about identification test; Eyewitnesses to crime viewing identification parades; Identification confidence and accuracy relationship; Influence of police witness interactions; Obtaining and interpreting eyewitness identification test evidence; Police witness interactions at identification test and pre decision influences; Pre identification test interactions; Unbiased line up instructions; Verbal overshadowing effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 74749098610     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470747599.ch12     Document Type: Chapter

References (42)

1. Bradfield, A. & McQuiston, D. E. (2004). When does evidence of eyewitness confi-dence inflation affect judgments in a criminal trial? Law and Human Behavior, 28, 369-387.
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, 11,3-4.
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. & Wells, G. L. (2006). The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: Effects of line-up instructions, foil similarity and target-absent base rates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12,11-30.
7. Brewer, N., Weber, N. & Semmler, C. (2005). Eyewitness identification. In N. Brewer & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 177-221). New York: Guilford Press.
8. Clark, S. E. (2005). A re-examination of the effects of biased line-up instructions in eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 29,395-424.
9. Clark, S. E. & Wells, G. L. (2008). On the diagnosticity of multiple-witness identifications . Law and Human Behavior, 32,406-422.
10. Cutler, B. L. & Penrod, S. D. (1995). Mistaken identification: The eyewitness, psychology, and the law. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D. & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Jury decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12,41-56.
12. Douglass, A. B., Smith, C. & Fraser-Thill, R. (2005). A problem with double-blind photospread procedures: Photospread administrators use one eyewitness' s confi-dence to influence the identification of another witness. Law and Human Behavior, 29,543-562.
13. Garrioch, L. & Brimacombe, C. (2001). Line-up administrators' expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law & Human Behavior, 25,299-314.
14. Hafstad, G. S., Memon, A. & Logie, R. (2004). Post-identification feedback, confi-dence and recollections of witnessing conditions in child witnesses. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18,901-912.
15. Harris, M. J. & Rosenthal, R. (1985). Mediation of interpersonal expectancy effects: 31 meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 97,363-386.
16. Innocence Project (2009). Innocence project. http://www.innocenceproject.org/about/index.php. Accessed 23 March 2009.
17. Jones, E. E., Williams, K. D. & Brewer, N. (2008). 'I had a confidence epiphany!': Obstacles to combating post-identification confidence inflation. Law and Human Behavior, 32,164-176.
18. Juslin, P., Olsson, N. & Winman, A. (1996). Calibration and diagnosticity of confi-dence in eyewitness identification: Comments on what can be inferred from the low confidence-accuracy correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22,1304-1316.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. Luus, C. & Wells, G. L. (1994). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79,714-723.
23. Malpass, R. S. & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Line-up instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66,482-489.
24. Meissner, C. A. & Brigham, J. C. (2001). A meta-analysis of the verbal overshadowing effect in face identification. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16,911-928.
25. Memon, A., Gabbert, F. & Hope, L. (2004). The ageing eyewitness. In J. Adler (Ed.), Forensic psychology: Debates, concepts and practice. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
26. Morrell, H. E. R., Gaitan, S. & Wixted, J. T. (2002). On the nature of the decision axis in signal-detection-based models of recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28,1095-1110.
27. Pike, G., Brace, N. & Kynan, S. (2002). The visual identification of suspects: Procedures and practice. Briefing Note 2/02. London: Home Office.
28. Potter, R. & Brewer, N. (1999). Perceptions of witness behaviour-accuracy relationships held by police, lawyers and jurors. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 6,97-103.
29. Schooler, J. W. & Engstler-Schooler, T. Y. (1990). Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid. Cognitive Psychology, 22,36-71.
30. 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.
31. 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.
32. Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of line-up instruction effects. Law & Human Behavior, 21, 283-297
33. Stretch, V. & Wixted, J. T. (1998). On the difference between strength-based and frequency-based mirror effects in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24,1379-1396.
34. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
35. Wells, G. L. (1988). Eyewitness identification: A system handbook. Toronto: Carswell Legal Publications.
36. 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.
37. Wells, G. L. & Bradfield, A. L. (1999). Distortions in eyewitnesses' recollections: Can the postidentification-feedback effect be moderated? Psychological Science, 10, 138-144.
38. Wells, G. L. & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1980). On estimating the diagnosticity of eyewitness nonidentifications. Psychological Bulletin, 88,776-784.
39. Wells, G. L. & Luus, E. (1990). Police line-ups as experiments: Social methodology as a framework for properly-conducted line-ups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16,106-117.
40. Wells, G. L. & Olson, E. A. (2002). Eyewitness identification: Information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8,155-167.
41. 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.
42. Wells, G. L., Memon, A. & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Eyewitness evidence: Improving its probative value. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7,45-75.