Moderators of post-identification feedback effects on eyewitnesses' memory reports

Legal and Criminological Psychology

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 279-292

  Douglass, Amy Bradfield ^a   Brewer, Neil ^b   Semmler, Carolyn ^c  

^a BATES COLLEGE   (United States)

^b FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEMORY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESPONSE VARIABLE; STATISTICS; WITNESS;

EID: 77956587631     PISSN: 13553259     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135532509X446337     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Australian Law Reform Commission (2005). Discussion Paper 69, Review of the Uniform Evidence Acts.
2. Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 485-499.
3. 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.
4. Bradfield, A. L., & Wells, G. L. (2005). Not the same old hindsight bias: Outcome information distorts a broad range of recollections. Memory and Cognition, 33, 120-130.
5. Brewer, N. (2006). Uses and abuses of eyewitness identification confidence. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 3-23. doi:10.1348/ 135532505X79672
6. Douglass, A. B., & McQuiston-Surrett, D. E. (2006). Post-identification feedback: Exploring the effects of sequential photospread presentation and warning eyewitnesses of the identification task. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 991-1008.
7. Douglass, A. B., Neuschatz, J. S., Imrich, J. F., & Wilkinson, M. (2009). Does post-identification feedback affect evaluations of eyewitness testimony and identification procedures? Law and Human Behavior. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10979-009-9189-5
8. 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.
9. Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1(3), 288-299.
10. Fisher, R. P., & Geiselman, R. E. (1992). Memory-enhancing techniques for investigative interviewing: The cognitive interview. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
11. Gabbert, F., Hope, L., & Fisher, R. P. (2009). Protecting eyewitness evidence: Examining the efficacy of a self-administered interview tool. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 298-307. doi:10.1007/s10979-008-9146-8
12. Guilbault, R. L., Bryant, F. B., Brockway, J. H., & Posavac, E. J. (2004). A meta-analysis of research on hindsight bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 103-117.
13. 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.
14. Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103, 490-517.
15. Kruger, J. (1999). Lake Wobegon be gone! The 'below-average effect' and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 221-232.
16. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1121-1134.
17. Lampinen, J. M., Scott, J., Pratt, D., Leding, J. K., & Arnal, J. D. (2007). 'Good, you identified the suspect . . . but please ignore this feedback': Can warnings eliminate the effects of post-identification feedback? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 1037-1056.
18. Leippe, M. R., Eisenstadt, D., & Rauch, S. M. (2009). Cueing confidence in eyewitness identifications: Influence of biased lineup instructions and pre-identification memory feedback under varying lineup conditions. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 194-212. doi:10.1007/s10979-008-9135-y
19. Neil v. Biggers. 409 U.S. 188 (1972).
20. Neuschatz, J. S., Lawson, D. S., Fairless, A. H., Powers, R. A., Neuschatz, J. S., & Goodsell, C. A. (2007). The mitigating effects of suspicion on post-identification feedback and on retrospective eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 231-247.
21. Neuschatz, J. S., Preston, E. L., Burkett, A. D., Toglia, M. P., Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., et al. (2005). The effects of post-identification feedback and age on retrospective eyewitness memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 435-453.
22. Quinlivan, D. S., Neuschatz, J. S., Jiminez, A., Cling, A. D., Douglass, A. B., & Goodsell, C. A., (2009). Do prophylactics prevent inflation?: Post-Identification feedback and the effectiveness of procedures to protect against confidence-inflation in earwitnesses. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 111-121.
23. Queen's Bench 224 R v. Turnbull (1976).
24. 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.
25. Shaw, J. S., III, Appio, L. M., Zerr, T. K., & Pontoski, K. E. (2007). Public eyewitness confidence can be influenced by the presence of other witnesses. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 629-652.
26. Shaw, J. S., III, Zerr, T. K., & Woythaler, K. (2001). Public eyewitness confidence ratings can differ from those held privately. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 141-154.
27. Skagerberg, E. M. (2007). Co-witness feedback in line-ups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 489-497.
28. Vicario, G. B., & Tomat, L. (1998). Testimony in a social setting. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86, 1075-1082.
29. Weber, N., & Brewer, N. (2008). Eyewitness recall: Regulation of grain size and the role of confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 50-60.
30. Weber, N., Brewer, N., & Margitich, S. (2008). The confidence-accuracy relation in eyewitness identification: Effects of verbal versus numeric confidence scales. In K. H. Kiefer (Ed.), Applied psychology research trends (pp. 103-118). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
31. 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.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1996). Measuring psychological uncertainty: Verbal versus numeric methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2, 343-364.
35. Wright, D. B., & Skagerberg, E. M. (2007). Postidentification feedback affects real eyewitnesses. Psychological Science, 18, 172-178.