Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line-up

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-23

  Valentine, Tim ^a   Davis, Josh P ^b   Memon, Amina ^c   Roberts, Andrew ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GREENWICH   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLOTHING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERSONAL APPEARANCE; PHOTOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF REPORT; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; VIDEORECORDING; WITNESS;

EID: 84856008646     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1796     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Behrman, B. W., & Davey, S. L. (2001). Eyewitness identification in actual criminal cases: An archival analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 475-491.
2. Blunt, M. R., & McAllister, H. A. (2009). Mug shot exposure effects: Does size matter? Law and Human Behavior, 33, 175-182.
3. Bogan, P. (2004). Identification: Investigation, trial and scientific evidence. London: Legal Action Group.
4. Brown, E., Deffenbacher, K., & Sturgill, W. (1977). Memory for faces and the circumstances of encounter. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 311-318.
5. Brigham, J. C., & Cairns, D. L. (1988). The effect of mugshot inspections on eyewitness identification accuracy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1394-1410.
6. Buckhout, R. (1974). Eyewitness testimony. Scientific American, 231, 23-31.
7. Cutler, B. L., & Fisher, R. P. (1990). Live lineups, videotaped lineups, and photo-arrays. Forensic Reports, 3, 439-448.
8. 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.), In Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 163-182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identifications: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 281-290.
10. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., O'Rourke, T. E., & Martens, T. K. (1987). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Putting context into context. Social Behavior, 1, 113-134.
11. Cutting, J. E., & Kozlowski, L. T. (1977). Recognising friends by their walk: Gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 353-356.
12. Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., McGorty, E. K., & Penrod, S. D. (2008). Forgetting the once-seen face: Estimating the strength of an eyewitness's memory representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 139-150.
13. 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.
14. Devlin P. (1976). Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Departmental Committee on Evidence of Identification in Criminal Cases, HC 338, London: HMSO.
15. Dysart, J. E., Lindsay, R. C. L., Hammond, R., & Dupuis, P. R. (2001). Mug shot exposure prior to lineup identification: Interference, transference, and commitment effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1280-1284.
16. Dysart, J., Lindsay, R. C. L. & Dupuis, P. R. (2006). Show-ups: The critical issue of clothing bias. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1009-1023.
17. Dysart, J. E., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2007a). Show-up identifications: Suggestive technique or reliable method? In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. R. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. II, Memory for people (pp. 137-153). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Dysart, J. E., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2007b). The effect of delay on eyewitness identification accuracy: Should we be concerned? In R. C. L. Lindsay, D. R. Ross, J. D. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. II, Memory for people (pp. 361-376). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Earles, J. L., Kesten, A. W., Curtayne, E. S., & Perle, J. G. (2008). That's the man who did it, or was it a woman? Actor similarity and binding errors in event memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1185-89.
20. Egan, D., Pittner, M., & Goldstein, A. G. (1977). Eyewitness identification: Photographs vs. live models. Law and Human Behavior, 1, 199-206.
21. 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.
22. Godfrey, R. D., & Clark, S. E. (2010). Repeated eyewitness identification procedures: Memory, decision making and probative value. Law and Human Behavior, 34, 241-258.
23. Gonzalez, R., Ellsworth, P., & Pembroke, M. (1993). Response biases in lineups and showups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 525-537.
24. Goodsell, C. A., Neuschatz J. S., & Gronlund, S. D. (2009). Effects of mugshot commitment on lineup performance in young and older adults. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 788-803.
25. Gorenstein, G. W., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1980). Effect of choosing an incorrect photograph on a later identification by an eyewitness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 616-622.
26. Haw, R. M., Dickinson, J. J., & Meissner, C. A. (2007). The phenomenology of carryover effects between show-up and line-up identification. Memory, 15, 117-127.
27. Hinz, T., & Pezdek, K. (2001). The effect of exposure to multiple lineups on face identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 185-198.
28. Innocence Project (2011). [accessed on 29 January 2011].
29. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, J., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
30. Laughery, K. R., Fessler, P. K., Lenorovitz, D. R., & Yoblick, D. A. (1974). Time delay and similarity effects in facial recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 490-496.
31. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wallbridge, H., & Drennan, D. (1987). Do the clothes make the man? An exploration of the effect of lineup attire on eyewitness identification accuracy. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 19, 463-478.
32. Mauldin, M. A., & Laughery, K. R. (1981). Composite production effects of subsequent facial recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 351-357.
33. Memon, A., Hope, L., Bartlett, J., & Bull, R. (2002). Eyewitness recognition errors: The effects of mugshot viewing and choosing in young and old adults. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1219-1227.
34. Naughton, M. (2003). How big is the 'iceberg'? A zemiological approach to quantifying miscarriages of justice. Radical Statistics, 81, 5-17.
35. O'Donnell, C., & Bruce, V. (2001). Familiarisation with faces selectively enhances sensitivity to changes made to the eyes. Perception, 30, 755-764.
36. Pezdek, K., & Blandon-Gitlin, I. (2005). When is an intervening line-up most likely to affect eyewitness identification accuracy? Legal & Criminological Psychology, 10, 247-263.
37. Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) Codes of Practice, Code D (2008). [accessed on 29 January 2010]
38. R v Forbes (2001). 1 All ER 686.
39. Ross, D. E., Marsil, D. F., Benton, T. R., Hoffman, R., Warren, A. R., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Metzger, R. (2006). Children's Susceptibility to misidentifying a familiar bystander from a lineup: When younger is better. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 249-257.
40. Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2000). Actual innocence: Five days to execution and other dispatches from the wrongly convicted. New York: Doubleday.
41. 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.
42. Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 523-540.
43. Stevenage, S. V., Nixon, M. S., & Vince, K. (1999). Visual analysis of gait as a cue to identity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 513-526.
44. Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
45. Valentine, T. (2006). Forensic facial identification. In: A. Heaton-Armstrong, E. Shepherd, G. Gudjonsson, & D. Wolchover (eds.). Witness testimony: Psychological, investigative and evidential perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (pp. 281-307.)
46. Valentine, T., Pickering, A., & Darling, S. (2003). Characteristics of eyewitness identification that predict the outcome of real lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 969-993.
47. Wells, G. L., Memon, A., & Penrod, S. D. (2006). Eyewitness evidence: Improving its probative value. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 45-75.
48. 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.
49. Wells, G. L., & Turtle, J. W. (1986). Eyewitness identification: The importance of lineup models. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 320-329.
50. Wolchover, D., & Heaton-Armstrong, A. (2004). Ending the farce of staged street identifications. Archbold News, 3, 5-7.
51. Yarmey, A. D., Yarmey, M. J., & Yarmey, A. L. (1996). Accuracy of eyewitness identification in show-ups and line-ups. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 459-477.