A role for theory in eyewitness identification research

The Handbook of Eyewitness Psychology: Volume II: Memory for People

Volumn 2, Issue , 2007, Pages 201-218

  Brewer, Neil ^a   Weber, Nathan ^a   Semmler, Carolyn ^a  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85075651945     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203936368-15     Document Type: Chapter

References (59)

1. Baranski, J. V., & Petrusic, W. M. (1998). Probing the locus of confidence judgments: Experiments on the time to determine confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 929-945.
2. Baranski, J. V., & Petrusic, W. M. (2001). Testing architectures of the decision-confidence relation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 195-206.
3. Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1-62). New York: Academic Press.
4. 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.
5. Brewer, N., & Burke, A. (2002). Effects of testimonial inconsistencies and eyewitness confidence on mock-juror judgments. Law & Human Behavior, 26, 353-364.
6. Brewer, N., Keast, A., & Rishworth, A. (2002). The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: The effects of reflection and disconfirmation on correlation and calibration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 44-56.
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.
8. 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.
9. Broder, A., & Schiffer, S. (2003). Take The Best versus simultaneous feature matching: Probabilistic inferences from memory and effects of representation format. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 277-293.
10. Brownstein, A. L. (2003). Biased predecision processing. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 545-568.
11. Busey, T. A., Tunnicliff, J., Loftus, G. R., & Loftus, E. F. (2000). Accounts of the confidence-accuracy relation in recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 26-48.
12. Clare, J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2004). Verbalizing facial memory: Criterion effects in verbal overshadowing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 739-755.
13. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law & Human Behavior, 12, 41-55.
14. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
15. Garrioch, L., & Brimacombe, C. (2001). Lineup administrators’ expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law & Human Behavior, 25, 299-314.
16. Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1-67.
17. Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 95, 528-551.
18. Juslin, P., Olsson, N., & Winman, A. (1996). Calibration and diagnosticity of confidence in eyewitness identification: Comments on what can be inferred from the low confidence-accuracy correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1304-1316.
19. Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 682 (1972).
20. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370.
21. Lindsay, D., Nilsen, E., & Read, J. (2000). Witnessing-condition heterogeneity and witnesses’ versus investigators’ confidence in the accuracy of witnesses’ identification decisions. Law & Human Behavior, 24, 685-697.
22. Lindsay, D., Read, J., & Sharma, K. (1998). Accuracy and confidence in person identification: The relationship is strong when witnessing conditions vary widely. Psychological Science, 9, 215-218.
23. Lindsay, R., & Wells, G. L. (1985). Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556-564.
24. Luus, C., & Wells, G. L. (1994). The malleability of eyewitness confidence: Co-witness and perseverance effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 714-723.
25. Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482-489.
26. Memon, A., Gabbert, F., & Hope, L. (2004). The ageing eyewitness. In J. Adler (Ed.), Forensic psychology: Debates, concepts and practice. Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.
27. Mills, J. (1965). The effect of certainty on exposure to information prior to commitment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 348-355.
28. Mills, J., & Ford, T. E. (1995). Effects of importance of a prospective choice on private and public evaluations of the alternatives. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 256-266.
29. Mills, J., & Jellison, J. M. (1968). Avoidance of discrepant information prior to commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 59-62.
30. Olsson, N. (2000). A comparison of correlation, calibration, and diagnosticity as measures of the confidence-accuracy relationship in witness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 504-511.
31. Olsson, N., Juslin, P., & Winman, A. (1998). Realism of confidence in earwitness versus eyewitness identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 101-118.
32. O’Neal, E. (1971). Influence of future choice importance and arousal upon the halo effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 19, 334-340.
33. Pansky, A., Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (2005). Eyewitness recall and testimony. In N. Brewer & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 93-50). New York: Guilford.
34. People v. McDonald, 37 Cal.3d 351, 690 P.2d 709, 716, 208 Cal. Rptr. 236, 245 (1984).
35. Perfect, T. J. (2002). When does eyewitness confidence predict performance? In T. J. Perfect & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 95-120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Perfect, T. J., & Schwartz, B. L. (Eds.). (2002). Applied metacognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Pike, G., Brace, N., & Kynan, S. (2002). The visual identification of suspects: Procedures and practice (Briefing Note 2/02). London: Home Office.
38. Pozzulo, J. D., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1998). Identification accuracy of children versus adults: A meta-analysis. Law & Human Behavior, 22, 549-570.
39. Read, J. (1995). The availability heuristic in person identification: The sometimes misleading consequences of enhanced contextual information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 91-121.
40. Read, J., Lindsay, D., & Nicholls, T. (1998). The relation between confidence and accuracy in eyewitness identification studies: Is the conclusion changing? In C. P. Thompson, D. J. Herrmann, J. D. Read, D. Bruce, D. G. Payne, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Eyewitness memory: Theoretical and applied perspectives (pp. 107-130). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. Semmler, C., & Brewer, N. (in press). Postidentification feedback effects on face recognition confidence: Evidence for metacognitive influences. Applied Cognitive Psychology.
42. 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.
43. Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law & Human Behavior, 21, 283-297.
44. Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law & Human Behavior, 25, 459-473.
45. Svenson, O. (1992). Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre-and post-decision processes. Acta Psychologica, 80, 143-168.
46. Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence. (1999). Eyewitness evidence: A guide for law enforcement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
47. Tulving, E. (1981). Similarity relations in recognition. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 479-496.
48. United States v. Ash, 413 U.S. 300 (1973).
49. United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967).
50. Van Zandt, T. (2000). ROC curves and confidence judgments in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 582-600.
51. Vickers, D. (1979). Decision processes in visual perception. New York: Academic Press.
52. Weber, N., & Brewer, N. (2003). The effect of judgment type and confidence scale on confidence-accuracy calibration in face recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 490-499.
53. Weber, N., & Brewer, N. (2004). Confidence-accuracy calibration in absolute and relative face recognition judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 156-172.
54. Wells, G. L. (1984). The psychology of lineup identifications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 89-103.
55. 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.
56. Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1999). Distortions in eyewitnesses’ recollections: Can the postidentification-feedback effect be moderated? Psychological Science, 10, 138-144.
57. Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2002). Eyewitness identification: Information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 155-167.
58. Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1996). Measuring psychological uncertainty: Verbal versus numeric methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2, 343-364.
59. Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (2001). How pleasant was your childhood? Beliefs about memory shape inferences from experienced difficulty of recall. Psychological Science, 12, 176-179.