Of guns and geese: a meta-analytic review of the 'weapon focus' literature

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 35-66

  Fawcett, Jonathan M ^a   Russell, Emily J ^b   Peace, Kristine A ^c   Christie, John ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c MACEWAN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

attention; cognition; eyewitness memory; memory; weapon focus

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869411124     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: 14772744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1068316X.2011.599325     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Antes, J.R. 1974. The time course of picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 62-70.
2. Beggar threatens raccoon to get cash. 1997, May 13. Los Angeles Times, p. 8.
3. *Behrman, B.W., & Davey, S.L. 2001. Eyewitness identification in actual criminal cases: An archival analysis. Law and Human Behaviour, 25, 475-491.
4. Brewer, N., Potter, R., Fisher, R.P., Bond, N., & Luszcz, M.A. 1999. Beliefs and data on the relationship between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 297-313.
5. Brown, J.M. 2003. Eyewitness memory for arousing events: Putting things into context. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 93-106.
6. Chinn, S. 2000. A simple method for converting an odds ratio to effect size for use in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 19: 3127-3131.
7. Christianson, S.-Å. 1986. Effects of positive emotional events on memory. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 27, 287-299.
8. Christianson, S.-Å., & Hübinette, B. 1993. Hands up! A study of witnesses' emotional reactions and memories associated with bank robberies. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, 365-379.
9. *Cooper, B.S., Kennedy, M.A., Herve, H.F. and Yuille, J.C. 2002. Weapon focus in sexual assault memories of prostitutes. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 25: 181-191.
10. *Cutler, B.L., & Penrod, S.D. 1988. Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 281-290.
11. Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Dexter, H.R. 1990. Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
12. *Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Martens, T.K. 1987a. The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 223-258.
13. *Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., & Martens, T.K. 1987b. Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Putting context into context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 629-637.
14. *Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D., O'Rourke, T.E. and Martens, T.K. 1986. Unconfounding the effects of contextual cues on eyewitness identification accuracy. Social Behavior, 1: 113-134.
15. *Cutshall, J.L. and Yuille, J.C. 1989. "Field studies of eyewitness memory of actual crimes". In Psychological methods in criminal investigation and evidence, Edited by: Raskin, D.C. 97-124. New York, NY: Springer.
16. *Davies, G.M., Smith, S., & Blincoe, C. 2008. A 'weapon focus' effect in children. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 1 9-28.
17. Davis, J.P., & Valentine, T. 2009. CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 482-505.
18. Deffenbacher, K.A. 2008. Estimating the impact of estimator variables on eyewitness identification: A fruitful marriage of practical problem solving and psychological theorizing. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 815-826.
19. Deffenbacher, K.A., Bornstein, B.H., Penrod. S. D, & McGorty, E.K. 2004. A meta-analytic review of the effects of high stress on eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 687-706.
20. Easterbrook, J.A. 1959. The effect of emotion on the utilization and organization of behavior. Psychological Review, 66, 183-201.
21. Egeth, H.E. 1993. What do we not know about eyewitness identification?. American Psychologist, 48: 577-580.
22. Goose held hostage in Canada robbery. 1997, April 26. Toledo Blade, p. 2.
23. Glass, G.V., McGaw, B. and Smith, M.L. 1981. Meta-analysis in social research, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24. Gray, P. 1971. Robbery and assault of bus drivers. Operations Research, 19, 257-269.
25. Hazell, P., O'Connell, D.O., Heathcote, D., Robertson, J. and Henry, D. 1995. Efficacy of tricyclic drugs in treating child and adolescent depression: A meta-analysis. British Medical Journal, 310: 897-901.
26. Hedges, L.V. 1982. Estimation of effect size from a series of independent experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 490-499.
27. Hedges, L.V. and Olkin, I. 1985. Statistical methods for meta-analysis, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28. *Hope, L., & Wright, D. 2007. Beyond unusual? Examining the role of attention in the weapon focus effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 951-961.
29. Hulse, L.M., & Memon, A. 2006. Fatal impact? The effects of emotional arousal and weapon presence on police officers' memories for a simulated crime. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11, 313-325.
30. *Johnson, C., & Scott, B. 1976. Eyewitness testimony and suspect identification as a function of arousal, sex of witness and scheduling of interrogation. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC
31. Kassin, S.M., & Gudjonsson, G.H. 2004. The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 33-67.
32. Kassin, S.M., Tubb, V.A., Hosch, H.M., & Memon, A. 2001. On the 'general acceptance' of eyewitness testimony research: A new survey of the experts. American Psychologist, 56, 405-416.
33. Kensinger, E.A., Garoff-Eaton, R.J., & Schacter, D.L. 2006. Memory for specific visual details can be enhanced by negative arousing content. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 99-112.
34. Koriat, A., Goldsmith, M., & Pansky, A. 2000. Toward a psychology of memory accuracy. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 481-537.
35. *Kramer, T.H., Buckhout, R., & Eugenio, P. 1990. Weapon focus, arousal and eyewitness memory: Attention must be paid. Law and Human Behaviour, 14, 167-184.
36. Kuehn, L.L. 1974. Looking down a gun barrel: Person perception and violent crime. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 39: 1159-1164.
37. Lipsey, M.W. and Wilson, D.B. 2000. Practical meta-analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Loftus, E.F. 1979. Eyewitness testimony, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39. *Loftus, E.F., Loftus, G.R., & Messo, J. 1987. Some facts about 'weapon focus'. Law and Human Behaviour, 1, 55-62.
40. Loftus, G.R., & Mackworth, N.H. 1978. Cognitive determinates of fixation location during picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4, 565-572.
41. *Maass, A., & Kohnken, G. 1989. Eyewitness identification: Simulating the 'weapon effect'. Law and Human Behaviour, 13, 397-408.
42. Malpass, R.S. (2006a). A policy evaluation of simultaneous and sequential lineups. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 12, 394-418.
43. Malpass, R.S. 2006b. Notes on the Illinois pilot program on sequential double-blind identification procedures. Public Interest Law Reporter, 11(2): 5-47.
44. Mastrobuoni, G. 2010. Everybody stay cool, this is a robbery. In N. Garoupa (Chair), Crime, labor, health. Panel conducted at the meeting of the American Law and Economics Association, Princeton University.
45. Mastrobuoni, G. 2011. Optimal criminal behavior and the disutility of jail: Theory and evidence on bank robberies. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved fromhttp://www.carloalberto.org/people/mastrobuoni/doc/ValueFreedom4.pdf
46. *Mecklenburg, S.H. 2006. Report to the legislature of the State of Illinois: The Illinois Pilot Program on double-blind, sequential lineup procedures, Springfield, IL: Illinois State Police.
47. *Mitchell, K.J., Livosky, M. and Mather, M. 1998. The weapon focus effect revisited: The role of novelty. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3: 287-303.
48. *O'Rourke, T.E., Penrod, S.D., Cutler, B.L., & Stuve, T.E. 1989. The external validity of eyewitness identification research: Generalizing across subject populations. Law and Human Behaviour, 13, 385-395.
49. Peace, K.A., & Porter, S. 2004. A longitudinal investigation of the reliability of memories for trauma and other emotional experiences. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1143-1159.
50. *Peters, D.P. 1988. Eyewitness memory and arousal in a natural setting. In M. Gruneberg, P. Morris, & R. Skyes, Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues: Vol. 1. Memory in everyday life (pp. 89-94). Chichester: Wiley.
51. Peters, J.D. 2001. Witnessing. Media, Culture, and Society, 23, 707-723.
52. Pike, G., Brace, N., & Kyman, S. 2002, March. The visual identification of suspects: Procedures and practices. (Briefing Note 2/02). London: Policing and Reducing Crime Unit Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. Retrieved from http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/brf202.pdf
53. Pickel, K.L. 1998. Unusualness and threat as possible causes of 'weapon focus'. Memory, 6, 277-295.
54. *Pickel, K.L. 1999. The influence of context on the 'weapon focus' effect. Law and Human Behaviour, 23, 299-311.
55. Pickel, K.L. 2007. "Remembering and identifying menacing perpetrators: Exposure to violence and the weapon focus effect". In The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol II: Memory for people, Edited by: Lindsay, R.C.L., Ross, D.F., Read, J.D. and Toglia, M.P. 339-360. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
56. *Pickel, K.L. 2009. The weapon focus effect on memory for female versus male perpetrators. Memory, 17, 664-678.
57. *Pickel, K.L., French, T., & Betts, J. 2003. A cross-modal weapon focus effect: The influence of a weapon's presence on memory for auditory information. Memory, 11, 277-292.
58. *Pickel, K.L., Narter, D.B., Jameson, M.M., & Lenhardt, T.T. 2008. The weapon focus effect in child eyewitnesses. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14, 61-72.
59. *Pickel, K.L., Ross, S.J., & Truelove, R.S. 2006. Do weapons automatically capture attention? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 871-893.
60. Porter, S., & Peace, K.A. 2007. The scars of memory: A prospective, longitudinal investigation of the consistency of traumatic and positive emotional memories in adulthood. Psychological Science, 18, 435-441.
61. R Development Core Team. 2010. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Development Core Team.
62. Rand Corporation. 1975, October. The criminal investigation process 1-3; Report No. R-1776-DOJ, R-1777-DOJ). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.
63. Reisberg, D. and Heuer, F. 2007. "The influence of emotion on memory for forensic settings". In The handbook of eyewitness psychology: Memory for events, Edited by: Toglia, M.P., Read, J.D., Ross, D.F. and Lindsay, R.C.L. 81-116. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
64. Rosenthal, R. 1978. Combining results of independent studies. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 185-193.
65. Ross, S.J., & Malpass, R.S. 2008. Moving forward: Response to 'Studying eyewitness investigations in the field'. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 16-21.
66. Sánchez-Meca, J., Marín-Martínez, F., & Chacón-Moscoso, S. 2003. Effect-size indices for dichotomized outcomes in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 8, 448-467.
67. *Saunders, J. 2009. Memory impairment in the weapon focus effect. Memory & Cognition, 37, 326-335.
68. Shaw, J.I., & Skolnick, P. 1994. Sex differences, weapon focus and eyewitness reliability. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 413-420.
69. *Shaw, J.I., & Skolnick, P. 1999. Weapon focus and gender differences in eyewitness accuracy: Arousal versus salience. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2328-2341.
70. Steblay, N.M. 1992. A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 413-424.
71. Steblay, N.M. 2010. What we know now: The Evanston Illinois field lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 1-12.
72. *Tollestrup, P.A., Turtle, J.W. and Yuille, J.C. 1994. "Actual victims and witnesses to robbery and fraud: An archival analysis". In Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments, Edited by: Ross, D., Read, D. and Ceci, C. 144-162. New York, NY: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
73. *Tooley, V., Brigham, J.C., Maass, A., & Bothwell, R.K. 1987. Facial recognition: Weapon effect and attentional focus. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 845-859.
74. Valentine, T., & Mesout, J. 2009. Eyewitness identification under stress in the London Dungeon. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 151-161.
75. *Valentine, T., Pickering, A., & Darling, S. 2003. Characteristics of eyewitness identification that predict the outcome of real lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 969-993.
76. van der Kolk, B.A. 1996. "Trauma and memory". In Traumatic stress, Edited by: van der Kolk, B., McFarlane, A. and Weisaeth, L. 279-302. New York, NY: Guildford Press.
77. Viechtbauer, W. 2010. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36: 1-48.
78. *Wagstaff, G.F., MacVeigh, J., Scott, L., Brunas-Wagstaff, J., & Cole, J. 2003. Can laboratory findings on eyewitness testimony be generalized to the real world? An archival analysis of the influence of violence, weapon presence, and age on eyewitness accuracy. Journal of Psychology, 137, 17-28.
79. Whipple, G. 1915. Psychology of testimony. Psychological Bulletin, 12, 221-224.
80. Whitehead, A., Bailey, A., & Elbourne, D. 1999. Combining summaries of binary outcomes with those of continuous outcomes in a meta-analysis. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 9, 1-16.
81. Yarmey, A.D. 2001. Expert testimony: Does eyewitness memory research have probative value for the courts? Canadian Psychology, 42, 92-100.
82. Yerkes, R.M., & Dodson, J.D. 1908. The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.
83. Wells, G.L. 2008. Field experiments on eyewitness identification: Towards a better understanding of pitfalls and prospects. Law and Human Behavior, 32 (1), 6-10.