Double-blind photo lineups using actual eyewitnesses: an experimental test of a sequential versus simultaneous lineup procedure.
TL;DR: The results suggest that the sequential procedure that is used in the field reduces the identification of known-innocent fillers, but the differences are relatively small.
Abstract: Eyewitnesses (494) to actual crimes in 4 police jurisdictions were randomly assigned to view simultaneous or sequential photo lineups using laptop computers and double-blind administration. The sequential procedure used in the field experiment mimicked how it is conducted in actual practice (e.g., using a continuation rule, witness does not know how many photos are to be viewed, witnesses resolve any multiple identifications), which is not how most lab experiments have tested the sequential lineup. No significant differences emerged in rates of identifying lineup suspects (25% overall) but the sequential procedure produced a significantly lower rate (11%) of identifying known-innocent lineup fillers than did the simultaneous procedure (18%). The simultaneous/sequential pattern did not significantly interact with estimator variables and no lineup-position effects were observed for either the simultaneous or sequential procedures. Rates of nonidentification were not significantly different for simultaneous and sequential but nonidentifiers from the sequential procedure were more likely to use the “not sure” response option than were nonidentifiers from the simultaneous procedure. Among witnesses who made an identification, 36% (41% of simultaneous and 32% of sequential) identified a known-innocent filler rather than a suspect, indicating that eyewitness performance overall was very poor. The results suggest that the sequential procedure that is used in the field reduces the identification of known-innocent fillers, but the differences are relatively small.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The reliability and integrity of eyewitness identification evidence is highly dependent on the procedures used by law enforcement for collecting and preserving the eyewitness evidence, and these nine recommendations can advance the reliability and Integrity of the evidence.
Abstract: Objective The Executive Committee of the American Psychology-Law Society (Division 41 of the American Psychological Association) appointed a subcommittee to update the influential 1998 scientific review paper on guidelines for eyewitness identification procedures. Method This was a collaborative effort by six senior eyewitness researchers, who all participated in the writing process. Feedback from members of AP-LS and the legal communities was solicited over an 18-month period. Results The results yielded nine recommendations for planning, designing, and conducting eyewitness identification procedures. Four of the recommendations were from the 1998 article and concerned the selection of lineup fillers, prelineup instructions to witnesses, the use of double-blind procedures, and collection of a confidence statement. The additional five recommendations concern the need for law enforcement to conduct a prelineup interview of the witness, the need for evidence-based suspicion before conducting an identification procedure, video-recording of the entire procedure, avoiding repeated identification attempts with the same witness and same suspect, and avoiding the use of showups when possible and improving how showups are conducted when they are necessary. Conclusions The reliability and integrity of eyewitness identification evidence is highly dependent on the procedures used by law enforcement for collecting and preserving the eyewitness evidence. These nine recommendations can advance the reliability and integrity of the evidence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
95 citations
Cites background from "Double-blind photo lineups using ac..."
...Even if the eyewitness does not identify an innocent suspect, culprit-absent lineups strongly increase the chances that the eyewitness will identify a filler (Wells, 1984; Wells et al., 2015)....
[...]
...The medical field’s understanding of the impact of base rates on medical diagnostic test outcomes is far ahead of the legal system’s understanding of the impact of base rates in eyewitness lineup test outcomes (Wells et al., 2015)....
[...]
...Even when the witness does not identify the innocent suspect in a culprit-absent lineup, they often identify a known-innocent lineup filler (Clark & Wells, 2008; Wells & Lindsay, 1980; Wells & Olson, 2002; Wells et al., 2015)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a meta-analysis of the post-identification feedback effect involving 7,000 participants from the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia is presented. And the results show that confirming feedback robustly inflates eyewitnesses' retrospective judgments across experimental manipulations and laboratory settings with large effect sizes.
Abstract: Eyewitnesses' retrospective reports of certainty, view, attention, and other judgments constitute central variables used by courts to assess the credibility of eyewitness identification evidence. Recently, important state Supreme Court decisions (e.g., New Jersey v. Henderson, 2011; Oregon v. Lawson, 2012) have relied on psychological research regarding the post-identification feedback effect to revamp their assumptions about when witness retrospective self-reports can be trusted. The post-identification feedback effect, originally demonstrated by Wells and Bradfield (1998), refers to the way in which witness self-reports are distorted by feedback to the witnesses that suggests that their identifications were accurate or mistaken. We present a meta-analysis of the post-identification effect involving 7,000 participants from the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia. The results show that confirming feedback robustly inflates eyewitnesses' retrospective judgments across experimental manipulations and laboratory settings with large effect sizes. We describe the policy implications of the feedback effect with regard to the need for double-blind lineup procedures. Moreover, we propose that testimony-relevant witness judgments should be collected and documented, preferably with videotape, before feedback can occur. We use moderator analyses to examine the current explanation of the feedback effect and delineate new research questions that could help develop a more complete theoretical understanding of the processes giving rise to the effect.
83 citations
TL;DR: The findings suggest that confidence in an eyewitness identification from a fair lineup is a highly reliable indicator of accuracy and if there is any difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two lineup formats, it likely favors the simultaneous procedure.
Abstract: Laboratory-based mock crime studies have often been interpreted to mean that (i) eyewitness confidence in an identification made from a lineup is a weak indicator of accuracy and (ii) sequential lineups are diagnostically superior to traditional simultaneous lineups. Largely as a result, juries are increasingly encouraged to disregard eyewitness confidence, and up to 30% of law enforcement agencies in the United States have adopted the sequential procedure. We conducted a field study of actual eyewitnesses who were assigned to simultaneous or sequential photo lineups in the Houston Police Department over a 1-y period. Identifications were made using a three-point confidence scale, and a signal detection model was used to analyze and interpret the results. Our findings suggest that (i) confidence in an eyewitness identification from a fair lineup is a highly reliable indicator of accuracy and (ii) if there is any difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two lineup formats, it likely favors the simultaneous procedure.
83 citations
Cites background from "Double-blind photo lineups using ac..."
...However, a different analysis based on filler ID rates from that same field study was interpreted as supporting the sequential procedure (23)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the National Research Council (NRC) issued a report that delineated weaknesses within various forensic examiners, including cognitive bias in forensic examinations. But, the NRC report focused on forensic examinations and did not address the issue of bias in criminal investigations.
Abstract: Criticism has emerged in the last decade surrounding cognitive bias in forensic examinations. The National Research Council (NRC, 2009) issued a report that delineated weaknesses within various for...
65 citations
TL;DR: A novel Bayesian treatment of the eyewitness identification problem as it relates to various system variables, such as instruction effects, lineup presentation format, lineup-filler similarity, lineup administrator influence, and show-ups versus lineups is provided.
Abstract: We provide a novel Bayesian treatment of the eyewitness identification problem as it relates to various system variables, such as instruction effects, lineup presentation format, lineup-filler similarity, lineup administrator influence, and show-ups versus lineups. We describe why eyewitness identification is a natural Bayesian problem and how numerous important observations require careful consideration of base rates. Moreover, we argue that the base rate in eyewitness identification should be construed as a system variable (under the control of the justice system). We then use prior-by-posterior curves and information–gain curves to examine data obtained from a large number of published experiments. Next, we show how information–gain curves are moderated by system variables and by witness confidence and we note how information–gain curves reveal that lineups are consistently more proficient at incriminating the guilty than they are at exonerating the innocent. We then introduce a new type of analysis that we developed called base-rate effect–equivalency (BREE) curves. BREE curves display how much change in the base rate is required to match the impact of any given system variable. The results indicate that even relatively modest changes to the base rate can have more impact on the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence than do the traditional system variables that have received so much attention in the literature. We note how this Bayesian analysis of eyewitness identification has implications for the question of whether there ought to be a reasonable-suspicion criterion for placing a person into the jeopardy of an identification procedure.
56 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Dec 1969TL;DR: The concepts of power analysis are discussed in this paper, where Chi-square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables, t-Test for Means, and Sign Test are used.
Abstract: Contents: Prefaces. The Concepts of Power Analysis. The t-Test for Means. The Significance of a Product Moment rs (subscript s). Differences Between Correlation Coefficients. The Test That a Proportion is .50 and the Sign Test. Differences Between Proportions. Chi-Square Tests for Goodness of Fit and Contingency Tables. The Analysis of Variance and Covariance. Multiple Regression and Correlation Analysis. Set Correlation and Multivariate Methods. Some Issues in Power Analysis. Computational Procedures.
115,069 citations
49,129 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, a crime was staged for 240 unsuspecting eyewitnesses either individually or in pairs, and one quarter of the eyewitnesses attempted identifications in each of four lineup conditions: six pictures were presented either simultaneously, as used in traditional procedures, or sequentially, in which yes/no judgments were made for each picture; each procedure either contained the photograph of the criminal-confederate or a picture of a similar looking replacement.
Abstract: Staged crime research has demonstrated the utility of controlling the conduct of lineups as a means of reducing false identifications with little or no apparent decline in the rate of correct identifications by eyewitnesses (e.g., Lindsay & Wells, 1980; Malpass & Devine, 1981a; Wells, 1984). A recent variation in lineup procedure shows that a blank lineup, which includes no suspects, can reduce the rate of false identifications if it precedes the actual lineup. However, there are several practical problems that make it unlikely that police will accept this procedure. Sequential lineup presentation is proposed as a means of accomplishing the same goals of reducing false identifications with little or no loss in accurate identifications. A crime was staged for 240 unsuspecting eyewitnesses either individually or in pairs. One quarter of the eyewitnesses attempted identifications in each of four lineup conditions: Six pictures were presented either simultaneously, as used in traditional procedures, or sequentially, in which yes/no judgments were made for each picture; each procedure either contained the photograph of the criminal-confederate or a picture of a similar looking replacement. Sequential lineup presentation significantly reduced false identifications but did not significantly influence correct identifications when compared with the simultaneous procedure. This resulted in an overall increase in diagnosticity ratio (Wells & Lindsay, 1980) using the sequential procedure. The data are interpreted as supporting the conclusion that sequential presentation of lineups can reduce false identifications of innocent suspects by reducing eyewitnesses' reliance on relativejudgment processes.
529 citations
"Double-blind photo lineups using ac..." refers background or methods in this paper
...In fact, back-loading was a central characteristic described as an important part of the sequential procedure from the outset and was used in the original simultaneous versus sequential experiment (Lindsay & Wells, 1985)....
[...]
...…to prevent witnesses from making “relative judgments” in which witnesses compare lineup members with each other and then show a propensity to identify the person who looks most like their memory of the culprit relative to the other members of the lineup (Lindsay & Wells, 1985; Wells, 1984)....
[...]
458 citations
"Double-blind photo lineups using ac..." refers background in this paper
...The empirical literature has exploded since that time, much of it focused on what can be done to improve the reliability of eyewitness evidence, an approach commonly known as the system-variable perspective (Wells, 1978)....
[...]
439 citations
"Double-blind photo lineups using ac..." refers background in this paper
...And, both logic and data tell us that the rate of filler identifications is higher when the suspect is innocent than when the suspect is guilty (e.g., Clark & Davey, 2005; Wells, 1993)....
[...]