Mistaken identification = erroneous conviction? assessing and improving legal safeguards

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

Volumn 2, Issue , 2007, Pages 557-572

  Van Wallendael, Lori R ^a   Cutler, Brian L ^a   Devenport, Jennifer ^b   Penrod, Steven ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

^b WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85075670831     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203936368-30     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Blonstein, R., & Geiselman, R. E. (1990). Effects of witnessing conditions and expert witness testimony on credibility of an eyewitness. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 8, 11-19.
2. Borchard, E. M. (1932). Convicting the innocent. Garden City, NY: Garden City Publishing.
3. Brigham, J. C., & Wolfskeil, M. P. (1983). Opinions of attorneys and law enforcement personnel on the accuracy of eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 7, 337-349.
4. Cutler, B. L., Dexter, H. R., & Penrod, S. D. (1990). Nonadversarial methods for sensitizing jurors to eyewitness evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 1197-1207.
5. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1989). The eyewitness, the expert psychologist, and the jury. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 311-332.
6. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
7. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Jury decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41-56.
8. Deffenbacher, K. A., & Loftus, E. F. (1982). Do jurors share a common understanding concerning eyewitness behavior? Law and Human Behavior, 6, 15-30.
9. Devenport, J. L., & Cutler, B. L. (2004). Impact of defense-only and opposing eyewitness experts on juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 569-576..
10. Devenport, J. L., Stinson, V., Cutler, B. L., & Kravitz, D. (2002). How effective are the crossexamination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors’ perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1042-1054.
11. Fox, S. G., & Walters, H. A. (1986). The impact of general versus specific expert testimony and eyewitness confidence upon mock juror judgment. Law and Human Behavior, 10, 215-228.
12. Hosch, H. M., Beck, E. L., & McIntyre, P. (1980). Influence of expert testimony regarding eyewitness accuracy on jury decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 287-296.
13. Huff, C. R. (1987). Wrongful conviction: Societal tolerance of injustice. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 4, 99-115.
14. Kassin, S. (1979). Personal communication cited by Wells, G. L. (1984). How adequate is human intuition for judging eyewitness testimony? In G. L. Wells & E. F. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives (pp. 256-272). New York: Cambridge University Press.
15. 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, 50(5), 405-416.
16. Kovera, M. B., Dickinson, J. J., & Cutler, B. L. (2003). Voir dire and jury selection: Practical issues, research findings, and directions for future research. In A. M. Goldstein (Ed.), Handbook of Psychology: Volume H. Forensic Psychology (pp. 161-175). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
17. Leippe, M. R., Eisenstadt, D., Rauch, S. M., & Seib, H. (2004). Timing of eyewitness expert testimony, jurors’ need for cognition, and case strength as determinants of trial verdicts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 524-541.
18. Lindsay, R.C.L. (1994). Expectations of eyewitness performance. In D. Ross, D. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 362-384). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & O’Connor, F. J. (1989). Mock juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses: A replication and extension. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 333-339.
20. Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & Rumpel, C. M. (1981). Can people detect eyewitness identification accuracy within and across situations? Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 79-89.
21. Loftus, E. F. (1974). Reconstructive memory: The incredible eyewitness. Psychology Today, 8, 116-119.
22. Loftus, E. F. (1980). Impact of expert psychological testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 9-15.
23. Maass, A., Brigham, J. C., & West, S. G. (1985). Testifying on eyewitness reliability: Expert advice is not always persuasive. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 207-299.
24. McConkey, K. M., & Roche, S. M. (1989). Knowledge of eyewitness memory. Australian Psychologist, 24, 377-384.
25. Narby, D. J., & Cutler, B. L. (1994). Effectiveness of voir dire as a safeguard in eyewitness cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 724-729.
26. Noon, E., & Hollin, C. R. (1987). Lay knowledge of eyewitness behaviour: A British survey. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1, 143-153.
27. Rahaim, G. L., & Brodsky, S. L. (1982). Empirical evidence versus common sense: Juror and lawyer knowledge of eyewitness accuracy. Law and Psychology Review, 7, 1-15.
28. Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2001). Actual innocence. New York: Signet.
29. Steblay, N. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 283-297.
30. Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001). Eyewitness accuracy in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 459-473.
31. Stinson, V., Devenport, J. L., Cutler, B. L., & Kravitz, D. A. (1996). How effective is the pres-ence-of-counsel safeguard? Attorney perceptions of suggestiveness, fairness, and correctabil-ity of biased lineup procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 64-75.
32. Stinson, V., Devenport, J. L., Cutler, B. L., & Kravitz, D. A. (1997). How effective is the motion-to-suppress safeguard? Judges’ perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 211-220.
33. Warden, R. (2003). The Illinois exonerated: Alejandro Dominguez. Northwestern University School of Law, Center on Wrongful Convictions. Retrieved December 30, 2003 from http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/Dominguez-IL.htm
34. Weinberg, H. I., & Baron, R. S. (1982). The discredible eyewitness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 60-67.
35. Wells, G. L. (1984). The psychology of lineup identifications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 89-103.
36. Wells, G. L. (1986). Expert psychological testimony: Empirical and conceptual analysis of effects [Special issue: The ethics of expert testimony]. Law and Human Behavior, 10, 83-95.
37. Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Ferguson, T. J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440-448.
38. Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Tousignant, J. P. (1980). Effects of expert psychological advice on human performance in judging the validity of eyewitness testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 275-285.
39. Wells, G. L., Rydell, S. M., & Seelau, E. P. (1993). The selection of distractors for eyewitness lineups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 835-844.