Charles A. Goodsell

TL;DR: Gronlund et al. as mentioned in this paper reanalyzed data from a study by Gronlund, Carlson, Dailey, and Goodsell (2009), which included simultaneous and sequential lineups, and using the same stimuli and procedures, collected new data using showup identifications.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the impact of retention interval on showup identifications, and concluded that immediate showups might be no worse than, and perhaps even better than, a lineup conducted after a delay.

TL;DR: The U.S. Supreme Court, state courts, and social science researchers have stated that showup identifications (one-person identifications) are less reliable than lineup identifications, and 74 % of eyewitness experts endorsed false identifications as more likely to occur from showups than lineups.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined two potential safeguards intended to protect accused persons against unreliable testimony from cooperating witnesses, and found that participants who were exposed to secondary confession evidence were significantly more likely to vote guilty than were participants in the no secondary confession control group.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that the same receiver operating characteristic (ROC) can also be traced from a single instruction condition in which each eyewitness decision is accompanied by a confidence rating.