Course Requirements

General Requirements: Complete readings (which will concentrate on recent research on eyewitness reliability, complemented by some older classics), complete weekly commentaries, organize a set of readings and class discussion around your writing topic, complete papers

Major Written: Conduct New Research or write proposals on eyewitness questions, or write a legal brief built on eyewitness research  15 pages double-spaced.

Minor Written: Commentaries in advance of 10 class meetings, file a 300 word commentary on readings in response to assigned readings. Submit commentary, critiques, evaluations, ideas for discussion. These are due Thursday morning at 9 am in advance of class. Commentaries should be numbered sequentially and the class date to which the commentary refers should be noted. Electronic submission only–see email address above--subject line should identifiy the class, the date the class meets

        Eyewitness Class 2/10/04  [indicate the class date]. #1

(please place comments in the body of the email rather than using attachments)

Textbooks: None

Readings: Assignments include relevant appendices--it is likely all readings will be provided electronically for downloading--some will be big files--downloading at JJ may be preferable to modem connections.  Rile will be broken into chunks of less than 1.4MB so they fit on floppies.

No Exam: No final.

Grades: 20% classroom participation,  30% commentaries, 20% timely reading of assignments (assessed at end of semester), 30% papers.

Link to AP-LS membership site: http://www.unl.edu/ap-ls/membership.htm  [$27 including 6 issues of Law and Human Behavior]

There is increasing evidence that false eyewitness identification is the primary cause of the conviction of innocent people. In 1996, the American Psychology/Law Society, Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, appointed a subcommittee to review scientific evidence and make recommendations regarding the best procedures for constructing and conducting lineups and photospreads. Three important themes from the scientific literature relevant to lineup methods were identified and reviewed, namely relative-judgment processes, the lineups-as-experiments analogy, and confidence malleability. Recommendations are made that double-blind lineup testing should be used, that eyewitnesses should be forewarned that the culprit might not be present, that distractors should be selected based on the eyewitness's verbal description of the perpetrator, and that confidence should be assessed and recorded at the time of identification. The potential costs and benefits of these recommendations are discussed.

Kassin, S. M. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: The fifth rule. Law & Human Behavior, 22, 649-653. 

Comments that the 4 recommendations of G. L. Wells et al (see record 1998-03228-001) to improve eyewitness identification procedures are ideally suited to minimize many potential problems. It is argued, however, that there is one recommendation (already being implemented in some precincts) that the authors considered and did not propose that is the most important rule of all: the videotaping of the lineup and witness identification. It is suggested that videotaping serves two essential functions: (1) establishing an objective record of the procedures followed independent of police self-report, and (2) providing the judge (for suppression hearing purposes), the attorneys (for advocacy purposes) and the jury (for fact-finding purposes) with an objective electronic record of the witness's decision and the context in which that decision was made.

Readings for Sept 15:  

Bruce W. Behrman, Sherrie L. Davey.  Eyewitness Identification in Actual Criminal Cases: An Archival Analysis, Law and Human Behavior 2001 25, 475-491.

This study analyzed 271 actual police cases in order to address several prevalent issues in the eyewitness literature. Suspect identification (SI) rates were obtained for 289 photographic lineups, 258 field showups, 58 live lineups, and 66 lineup identifications preceded by earlier identifications. SI rates were assessed for 3 levels of extrinsic evidence: no extrinsic evidence, evidence of minimal probative value, and evidence of substantial probative value. The SI rates for the photographic lineups were assessed as a function of delay, same vs cross-race conditions, witness type, and weapon presence. SI rates declined significantly over time; SI rates were significantly greater for the same-race condition. SI rates were much greater for field showups than photographic lineups, 76% vs 48%. The SI rates for the field showups did not vary as a function of eyewitness conditions. The relation between confidence and suspect/foil identifications for the live lineups was significant and moderately high. The utility of archival identification studies for eyewitness testimony research is discussed.

Bruce W. Behrman & Regina E. Richards. (2005). Suspect/Foil Identification in Actual Crimes and in the Laboratory: A Reality Monitoring Analysis.  Law and Human Behavior , 29, 279-301.

Four reality monitoring variables were used to discriminate suspect from foil identifications in 183 actual criminal cases. Four hundred sixty-one identification attempts based on five and six-person lineups were analyzed. These identification attempts resulted in 238 suspect identifications and 68 foil identifications. Confidence, automatic processing, eliminative processing and feature use comprised the set of reality monitoring variables. Thirty-five verbal confidence phrases taken from police reports were assigned numerical values on a 10-point confidence scale. Automatic processing identifications were those that occurred “immediately” or “without hesitation.” Eliminative processing identifications occurred when witnesses compared or eliminated persons in the lineups. Confidence, automatic processing and eliminative processing were significant predictors, but feature use was not. Confidence was the most effective discriminator. In cases that involved substantial evidence extrinsic to the identification 43% of the suspect identifications were made with high confidence, whereas only 10% of the foil identifications were made with high confidence. The results of a laboratory study using the same predictors generally paralleled the archival results. Forensic implications are discussed.
 

For Sept 22:  

Yarmey, A. D. (2004). Eyewitness recall and photo identification: a field experiment. Psychology, Crime & Law 10(1): 53-68. 

Some 590 men and women were tested in public places for interrogative recall and photo identification of a young woman to whom they had spoken for approximately 15 seconds, either 2 minutes earlier or 4 hours earlier. The target was seen originally either with or without a baseball cap and dark sunglasses. Witnesses were either prepared or not prepared at the time of the encounter for a subsequent memory test. Half of the witnesses were given imagery retrieval instructions or standard retrieval instructions prior to the two memory tests. A separate group of 379 introductory psychology students attempted to predict the performance of the eyewitnesses. Witness preparation was of more importance for recall of clothing characteristics than for physical characteristics. Witness preparation, target disguise, retention interval, gender of witnesses, and retrieval instructions had no significant main effects on identification. Forty-nine per cent of the witnesses given the target-present lineup correctly identified the target, and 62% correctly rejected the target-absent lineup. Student's beliefs in the accuracy of recall and identification were not consistent with eyewitnesses' performance.

Wagstaff, G. F., MacVeigh, J., Boston, R., 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(1): 17-28.

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: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 137(1), 17-28. The authors conducted 2 studies to assess the effects of levels of violence, the presence of a weapon, and the age of the witness on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in real-life crime situations. Descriptions of offenders were taken from eyewitnesses' statements obtained by the police and were compared with the actual details of the same offenders obtained on arrest. Data in Study 1 were taken from 62 victim and 8 nonvictim witnesses for crimes including robbery, rape, and assault. Data in Study 2 were taken from the statements of 48 females (aged 8-92 yrs) who had been victims of rape, attempted rape, or indecent assault. The results show that eyewitnesses tended to recall the offenders' hairstyle and hair color most accurately. None of the effects for the level of violence, the presence of a weapon, or age approached statistical significance, with the exception that, in the 1st study, accuracy in describing hair color was better when associated with high levels of violence and in cases of rape. It is argued that caution must be exercised in generalizing from laboratory studies of eyewitness testimony to actual crime situations.
 

Ihlebaek, C., Love, T., Eilertsen, D. E., & Magnussen, S. (2003). Memory for a staged criminal event witnessed live and on video. Memory 11(3): 319-327.

Ihlebaek, C., Love, T., Eilertsen, D. E., & Magnussen, S. (2003). Memory for a staged criminal event witnessed live and on video. Memory, 11(3), 319-327. Compared memory for a staged criminal event witnessed live and on video. Memory for robbery was tested in 126 participants (mean ages 29.8 and 30 yrs) witnessing the event either live or on video. Immediately after the event, Ss completed questionnaires probing memory with emphasis on the timing of the event and robber characteristics. Results show that Ss who watched a video recording of the event reported more details and with higher accuracy than Ss who were present on the scene, but the pattern of memory errors were similar in the 2 conditions. It is concluded that laboratory experiments may overestimate the memory of eyewitnesses, but are otherwise able to simulate essential aspects of memory performance in naturalistic contexts.
 

For Sept 29:  

Meissner, Christian A.; Brigham, John C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review.  Psychology, Public Policy, & Law., 7, 3-35.

The current article reviews the own-race bias (ORB) phenomenon in memory for human faces, the finding that own-race faces are better remembered when compared with memory for faces of another, less familiar race. Data were analyzed from 39 research articles, involving 91 independent samples and nearly 5,000 participants. Measures of hit and false alarm rates, and aggregate measures of discrimination accuracy and response criterion were examined, including an analysis of 8 study moderators. Several theoretical relationships were also assessed (i.e., the influence of racial attitudes and interracial contact). Overall, results indicated a "mirror effect" pattern in which own-race faces yielded a higher proportion of hits and a lower proportion of false alarms compared with other-race faces. Consistent with this effect, a significant ORB was also found in aggregate measures of discrimination accuracy and response criterion. The influence of perceptual learning and differentiation processes in the ORB are discussed, in addition to the practical implications of this phenomenon.

Steblay, N., Dysart, J., Fulero, S., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2003). Eyewitness accuracy rates in police showup and lineup presentations: A meta-analytic comparison. Law & Human Behavior 27(5): 523-540.

Meta-analysis is used to compare identification accuracy rates in showups and lineups. Eight papers were located, providing 12 tests of the hypothesis and including 3013 participants. Results indicate that showups generate lower choosing rates than lineups. In target present conditions, showups and lineups yield approximately equal hit rates, and in target absent conditions, showups produce a significantly higher level of correct rejections. False identification rates are approximately equal in showups and lineups when lineup foil choices are excluded from analysis. Dangerous false identifications are more numerous for showups when an innocent suspect resembles the perpetrator. Function of lineup foils, assessment strategies for false identifications, and the potential impact of biases in lineup practice are suggested as additional considerations in evaluation of showup versus lineup efficacy.

For Oct 6

Nancy Steblay, Jennifer Dysart, Solomon Fulero, R. C. L. Lindsay Eyewitness Accuracy Rates in Sequential and Simultaneous Lineup Presentations: A Meta-Analytic Comparison, Law and Human Behavior 2001 25, 459-473.

Most police lineups use a simultaneous presentation technique in which eyewitnesses view all lineup members at the same time. R. C. Lindsay and G. L. Wells (see record 1985-30824-001) devised an alternative procedure, the sequential lineup, in which witnesses view one lineup member at a time and decide whether or not that person is the perpetrator prior to viewing the next lineup member The present work uses the technique of meta-analysis to compare the accuracy rates of these presentation styles. 23 papers were located (9 published and 14 unpublished), providing 30 tests of the hypothesis and including 4,145 participants. Results show that identification of perpetrators from target-present lineups occurs at a higher rate from simultaneous than from sequential lineups, However, this difference largely disappears when moderator variables approximating real world conditions are considered. Also, correct rejection rates were significantly higher for sequential than simultaneous lineups and this difference is maintained or increased by greater approximation to real world conditions.

Clark, S. E., & Davey, S. L. (2005). The Target-to-Foils Shift in Simultaneous and Sequential Lineups. Law & Human Behavior, 29(2), 151-172.

A theoretical cornerstone in eyewitness identification research is the proposition that witnesses, in making decisions from standard simultaneous lineups, make relative judgments. The present research considers two sources of support for this proposal. An experiment by G. L. Wells (1993) showed that if the target is removed from a lineup, witnesses shift their responses to pick foils, rather than rejecting the lineups, a result we will term a target-to-foils shift Additional empirical support is provided by results from sequential lineups which typically show higher accuracy than simultaneous lineups, presumably because of a decrease in the use of relative judgments in making identification decisions. The combination of these two lines of research suggests that the target-to-foils shift should be reduced in sequential lineups relative to simultaneous lineups. Results of two experiments showed an overall advantage for sequential lineups, but also showed a target-to-foils shift equal in size for simultaneous and sequential lineups. Additional analyses indicated that the target-to-foils shift in sequential lineups was moderated in part by an order effect and was produced with (Experiment 2) or without (Experiment 1) a shift in decision criterion. This complex pattern of results suggests that more work is needed to understand the processes which underlie decisions in simultaneous and sequential lineups.
 

For Oct 13--No class

Data are reported from 3,213 research eyewitnesses confirming that accurate eyewitness identifications from lineups are made faster than are inaccurate identifications. However, consistent with predictions from the recognition and search literatures, the authors did not find support for the "10-12-s rule" in which lineup identifications faster than 10-12 s maximally discriminate between accurate and inaccurate identifications (D. Dunning & S. Perretta, 2002). Instead, the time frame that proved most discriminating was highly variable across experiments, ranging from 5 s to 29 s, and the maximally discriminating time was often unimpressive in its ability to sort accurate from inaccurate identifications. The authors suggest several factors that are likely to moderate the 10-12-s rule.

Phillips, Mark R.; McAuliff, Bradley D.; Kovera, Margaret Bull; Cutler, Brian L. (1999). Double-blind photoarray administration as a safeguard against investigator bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 940-951.

This experiment examined whether a photoarray administrator's knowledge of a suspect's identity increased false identification rates. Fifty participant-administrators (PAs) presented 50 participant-witnesses (PWs) two perpetrator-absent photoarrays following a live staged crime involving two perpetrators. For one photoarray per trial, the experimenter revealed the suspect's identity to the PA. Each PA presented the photoarrays sequentially or simultaneously in the presence or absence of an observer. When the observer was present, PA knowledge of the suspect's identity had a biasing effect in sequential photoarrays only. This pattern did not emerge when the observer was absent. The experimental manipulations did not affect PAs' and PWs' ratings of photoarray fairness or PWs' ratings of pressure to make an identification. These data suggest that only administrators who are blind to the suspect's identity should present sequential photoarrays.

 R. C. L., Lea, J. A., Nosworthy,G. J., Fulford, J. A., Hector, J., LeVan, V.,& Seabrook, C. (1991). Biased lineups: Sequential presentation reduces the problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 796-802.

Biased lineups have been shown to increase significantly false, but not correct, identification rates (R. C. Lindsay et al, 1987; Lindsay and G. L. Wells, 1980; R. S. Malpass and P. G. Devine, 1981). Lindsay and Wells (1985) found that sequential lineup presentation reduced false identification rates, presumably by reducing reliance on relative judgment processes. Five staged-crime experiments were conducted to examine the effect of lineup biases and sequential presentation on eyewitness recognition accuracy. Sequential lineup presentation significantly reduced false identification rates from fair lineups as well as from lineups biased with regard to foil similarity, instructions, or witness attire, and from lineups biased in all of these ways. The results support recommendations that police present lineups sequentially.

Fisher, Ronald P.; Mello, Eileen W.; McCauley, Michelle R. Are jurors' perceptions of eyewitness credibility affected by the cognitive interview?  Psychology, Crime & Law. 1999 Vol 5(1-2) 167-176.

Durham, Marcus D.; Dane, Francis C. Juror knowledge of eyewitness behavior: Evidence for the necessity of expert testimony. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality. 1999 Jun Vol 14(2) 299-308.

Although eyewitness identifications are among the most common forms of evidence presented in criminal trials, both archival studies and psychological research suggest that eyewitnesses are frequently mistaken in their identifications (B. L. Cutler & S. D. Penrod, 1995). In recognition of this problem, the legal system has established a number of safeguards to protect defendants from erroneous convictions resulting from mistaken identifications. These safeguards are based on assumptions regarding attorney, judge, and juror commonsense knowledge of the factors influencing eyewitness identification accuracy. This article addresses the validity of these assumptions by examining the role of commonsense knowledge in attorney, judge, and juror evaluations of eyewitness identification evidence. It concludes that, although these safeguards may not be as effective as the legal system intended them to be, there are a number of practices and policies that may be implemented to safeguard defendants further.

Morgan, C. A., Hazlett, G., Doran, A., Garrett, S., Hoyt, G., Thomas, P., et al. (2004). Accuracy of eyewitness memory for persons encountered during exposure to highly intense stress. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 27(3), 265-279.

In the present study, accuracy of suspect recognition after high-stress and low-stress interrogation was assessed. We also compared accuracy of eyewitness recognition using three established law-enforcement methods for identifying crime suspects: the live lineup, the photo-spread technique, and the sequential photo method. Based on previous literature and the Department of Justice (DOJ) guidelines, we hypothesized that accuracy rates of suspect recognition would be higher when using the sequential, compared to the live lineup and photo-spread techniques. We assessed differences in accuracy in eyewitness identification for cued and uncued photographs of suspects presented during the sequential photo method. Because studies in humans have shown that memory may be facilitated by contextual cues, we hypothesized that accuracy of suspect recognition would be better for cued, compared to uncued, photographs. 509 of 530 consecutively recruited, active-duty military personnel enrolled in military survival school training were the subjects of this investigation. Contrary to the popular conception that most people would never forget the face of a clearly seen individual who had physically confronted them and threatened them for more than 30 min, a large number of subjects in this study were unable to correctly identify their perpetrator. These data provide robust evidence that eyewitness memory for persons encountered during events that are personally relevant, highly stressful, and realistic in nature may be subject to substantial error.
 

Leippe, Michael R.; Eisenstadt, Donna; Rauch, Shannon M.; Seib, Hope M. (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.

In 2 experiments, college students read a murder-trial transcript that included or did not include court-appointed expert testimony about eyewitness memory. The testimony either preceded or followed the evidence, and the judge’s final instructions reminded or did not remind jurors about the expert’s testimony. Expert testimony decreased perceptions of guilt and eyewitness believability when it followed the evidence and preceded the judge’s reminder. This effect occurred whether the prosecution case was moderately weak or moderately strong. Jurors’ need for cognition (NC) was curvilinearly related to convictions in a strong case. Low and high NC jurors convicted less than did moderate NC jurors. Greater scrutiny by high NC jurors may make them more likely to consider evidence for the weaker side.

Gronlund, S. D. (2005). Sequential lineup advantage: Contributions of distinctiveness and recollection. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 23-37.

One procedural safeguard that may improve the reliability of eyewitness identification is a sequential lineup. A sequential lineup (view lineup members one at a time) is thought to be superior to a simultaneous lineup (view all lineup members at the same time) because the sequential lineup appears to make it less likely that a witness will choose someone from a lineup when the police have an innocent suspect. A framework developed from Estes' (1997) perturbation model was applied to the data from Gronlund (2004). According to the proposed framework, the sequential lineup advantage results only if distinctive information is encoded and recollection is used to access that information. Implications of this framework for lineup decision processes are discussed. An understanding of the mechanisms that underlie the sequential lineup advantage can strengthen arguments involving adoption of this procedural safeguard and improve its administration.

Clark, S. E. (2003). A memory and decision model for eyewitness identification. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17, 629-654.

A computer simulation model of eyewitness identification called WITNESS is proposed and fit to data from three experiments: Juslin et al. (1996), Tunnicliff and Clark (2000), and Wells et al. (1993). These three experiments directly compared two procedures for selecting foils for lineups: by selecting foils that either match the photograph of the suspect or match the description of the perpetrator given by the witness. The model assumes that (a) memory of a perpetrator is incomplete and error-prone, (b) lineup alternatives are matched to this error-prone memory trace, (c) identification decisions are based on a combination of relative and absolute match information, and (d) lineup rejections are based solely on absolute match information. The model provided good fits to data, although with important deviations between the model and data. Implications and limitations of the model, as well as future development of the model, are discussed.

Hinz, T., & Pezdek, K. (2001). The effect of exposure to multiple lineups on face identification accuracy. Law & Human Behavior, 25(2), 185-198.

Examines the conditions under which an intervening lineup affects identification accuracy on a subsequent lineup. 160 18-55 yr olds observed a photograph of one target individual for 60 sec. One week later, they viewed an intervening target-absent lineup and were asked to identify the target individual. Two days later, Ss were shown 1 of 3 6-person lineups that included a different photograph of the target face (present or absent), a foil face from the intervening lineup (present or absent), plus additional foil faces. The hit rate was higher when the foil face from the intervening lineup was absent from the test lineup and the false alarm rate was greater when the target face was absent from the test lineup. The results suggest that simply being exposed to an innocent suspect in an intervening lineup, whether that innocent suspect is identified by the witness or not, increases the probability of misidentifying the innocent suspect and decreases the probability of correctly identifying the true perpetrator in a subsequent test lineup. The implications of these findings both for police lineup procedures and for the interpretation of lineup results in the courtroom are discussed.

Wells, Gary L.; Olson, Elizabeth A. The other-race effect in eyewitness identification: What do we do about it? Psychology, Public Policy, & Law. 2001 Mar Vol 7(1) 230-246.

Meissner, Christian A.; Brigham, John C. Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law. 2001 Mar Vol 7(1) 3-35

Pezdek, K., I. Blandon-Gitlin, et al. (2003). "Children's face recognition memory: More evidence for the cross-race effect." Journal of Applied Psychology 88(4): 760-763.

Two experiments (N = 147 and N = 90) explored the use of multiple independent lineups to identify a target seen live. In Experiment 1, simultaneous face, body, and sequential voice lineups were used. In Experiment 2, sequential face, body, voice, and clothing lineups were used. Both studies demonstrated that multiple identifications (by the same witness) from independent lineups of different features are highly diagnostic of suspect guilt (G. L. Wells & R. C. L. Lindsay, 1980). The number of suspect and foil selections from multiple independent lineups provides a powerful method of calibrating the accuracy of eyewitness identification. Implications for use of current methods are discussed.

Lindsay, R. C., Smith, S. M., & Pryke, S. (1999). Measures of lineup fairness: Do they postdict identification accuracy? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S93-S107.

In three experiments, the authors examined the relationship of identification accuracy to measures of lineup bias (proportion of mock witness choices, defendant bias, and functional size) and lineup size (effective size and number of acceptable lineup members). Lineup bias measures successfully postdict false positive choices, but only for some lineup procedures. Lineup size measures rarely postdict false positive decisions. Lineup fairness measures do not postdict false identifications from sequential lineups. Implications for measuring and reporting lineup fairness in court are discussed.

Brigham, J. C., Meissner, C. A., & Wasserman, A. W. (1999). Applied issues in the construction and expert assessment of photo lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S73-S92.

For Someday

Levi, A. M. (1998b). Protecting innocent defendants, nailing the guilty: A modified sequential lineup. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 265-275.

Can the traditional lineup procedure be modified in such a way as to still secure positive identifications of guilty persons while minimizing the risk of misidentifications? The staff of police national headquarters served as the subject pool. Witnesses interacted with a culprit (5 male police officers, aged 30-40 yrs) who they were later called upon to identify from a 20-person sequential video lineup. Both culprit-present and culprit-absent lineups were employed and witnesses could choose more than one suspect. In 61 culprit-present lineups 43% chose only the suspect, while in 93 culprit-absent lineups no-one did. In culprit-present lineups 25% chose him along with foils, while 5% did so in culprit-absent lineups. Larger lineup size, and the ability to make multiple choices, helped lower the probability of choosing only an innocent suspect. Using Baysian analysis, the probability that a chosen defendant was innocent, based on the lineup alone, equalled 0.03, compared to 0.258 in traditional lineups.
 

Brewer, Neil; Keast, Amber; Rishworth, Amanda.  (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.

Participants viewed a simulated crime and attempted an identification from an 9-person target-present or target-absent lineup. The authors examined identification confidence-accuracy relations, contrasting a control condition (n = 310) with 2 manipulations designed to improve confidence scaling. Before indicating confidence, participants reflected on encoding and identification test conditions (n = 316) or suggested hypotheses about why their identification decision might have been wrong (n = 318). Confidence-accuracy correlations were weak and did not differ across conditions. However, for positive identifications, confidence and accuracy were well calibrated in the experimental conditions, although not in the control condition; similar patterns were observed for lineup rejections. Explanations for calibration differences in terms of discrimination difficulty, (mis)match between encoding and test stimuli, and the availability of confidence cues were advanced.
 

Kassin, Saul M.; Tubb, V. Anne; Hosch, Harmon M.; Memon, Amina  On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research.  American Psychologist, 2001, 56, 405-416

Memon, A., & Gabbert, F. (2003). Unravelling the effects of sequential presentation in culprit-present lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17, 703-714.

Greenberg, D. L. (2004) President Bush's false [flashbulb] memory of 9/11/01.  Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 363 - 370.

The end:  Future Readings are out of the question!!
 

Brandt, K. R., Macrae, C. N., Schloerscheidt, A. M., & Milne, A. B. (2003). Remembering or knowing others? Person recognition and recollective experience. Memory 11(1): 89-100.

 Wright, D. B., & Sladden, B. (2003). An own gender bias and the importance of hair in face recognition. Acta Psychologica 114(1): 101-114. 

 R. C. L., Lea, J. A., Nosworthy,G. J., Fulford, J. A., Hector, J., LeVan, V.,& Seabrook, C. (1991b). Biased lineups: Sequential presentation reduces the problem. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 796-802.

1. Cutler, B.L. & Penrod, S.D.  (1995).  

          2. NSF Grant proposal for eyewitness meta-analysis

Gronlund, S. D. (2005). Sequential lineup advantage: Contributions of distinctiveness and recollection. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 23-37.

One procedural safeguard that may improve the reliability of eyewitness identification is a sequential lineup. A sequential lineup (view lineup members one at a time) is thought to be superior to a simultaneous lineup (view all lineup members at the same time) because the sequential lineup appears to make it less likely that a witness will choose someone from a lineup when the police have an innocent suspect. A framework developed from Estes' (1997) perturbation model was applied to the data from Gronlund (2004). According to the proposed framework, the sequential lineup advantage results only if distinctive information is encoded and recollection is used to access that information. Implications of this framework for lineup decision processes are discussed. An understanding of the mechanisms that underlie the sequential lineup advantage can strengthen arguments involving adoption of this procedural safeguard and improve its administration.

Wells, G. L., & Bradfield, A. L. (1999). Measuring the goodness of lineups: Parameter estimation, question effects, and limits to the mock witness paradigm. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S27-S39.

Lineups and photospreads can be biased against a criminal suspect and there is a need to measure this bias. The mock witness method has been accepted by eyewitness scientists since the 1970s as the paradigm for generating the data on which various metrics of bias are based. The authors note the reasons that structural lineup bias can lead to mistaken identification and they also discuss the statistical metrics that are proposed to measure the degree of bias. Using mock witness data, the authors show that estimates of bias can vary as a function of the question asked of the mock witnesses. Various lineup biases that are not measured with the mock witness paradigm are noted, such as procedural biases and problems with propitious heterogeneity.

Lindsay, R. C., Smith, S. M., & Pryke, S. (1999). Measures of lineup fairness: Do they postdict identification accuracy? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S93-S107.

In three experiments, the authors examined the relationship of identification accuracy to measures of lineup bias (proportion of mock witness choices, defendant bias, and functional size) and lineup size (effective size and number of acceptable lineup members). Lineup bias measures successfully postdict false positive choices, but only for some lineup procedures. Lineup size measures rarely postdict false positive decisions. Lineup fairness measures do not postdict false identifications from sequential lineups. Implications for measuring and reporting lineup fairness in court are discussed.

Brigham, J. C., Meissner, C. A., & Wasserman, A. W. (1999). Applied issues in the construction and expert assessment of photo lineups. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, S73-S92.

Issues surrounding lineup fairness have been explored scientifically for over two decades. The present study investigates the applied/external validity of this line of research. First, several factors leading to bias in the construction of photo lineups are examined, and results of a preliminary survey on current law-enforcement practices are presented. Several statistics that have been developed to assess the fairness of lineups are reviewed and the application of these techniques to lineups used in 18 criminal cases is discussed, including the mixed agreement that sometimes occurs between estimates. Finally, we address the usefulness of lineup fairness assessment for expert testimony in the courtroom, and the dilemma that may be faced by the expert witness who is asked to testify by the defence. It is suggested that a useful and empirically justified index of overall lineup fairness can be created by combining a single estimate of bias (Functional Size) and a single estimate of lineup size (Effective Size) into a four-point index.

3. Legrand

Lindsay, Rod C. L.; Pozzulo, Joanna D. Sources of eyewitness identification error. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry. 1999 May-Aug Vol 22(3-4) 347-360

Ebbesen, Ebbe B.; Rienick, Cynthia B. Retention interval and eyewitness memory for events and personal identifying attributes. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1998 Oct Vol 83(5) 745-762.

Corey, Deb; Malpass, Roy S.; McQuiston, Dawn E Parallelism in eyewitness and mock witness identification. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1999 Nov Vol 13(Spec Issue)

Bornstein, Brian H.; Liebel, Lesley M.; Scarberry, Nikki C. Repeated testing in eyewitness memory: A means to improve recall of a negative emotional event. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1998 Apr Vol 12(2) 119-131.

Eyewitness Evidence: A Guide for Law Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice, October 1999

Kassin, Saul M. Eyewitness identification procedures: The fifth rule. Law & Human Behavior. 1998 Dec Vol 22(6) 649-653

Kebbell, Mark R.; Wagstaff, Graham F. Hypnotic interviewing: The best way to interview eyewitnesses? Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 1998 Win Vol 16(1) 115-129

Wells, Gary L.; Small, Mark; Penrod, Steven; Malpass, Roy S.; Fulero, Solomon M.; Brimacombe, C. A. E. Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law & Human Behavior. 1998 Dec Vol 22(6) 603-647

Ginet, M.; Py, J. Travail Humain. A technique for enhancing memory in eyewitness testimonies for use by police officers and judicial officials: The cognitive interview. 2001 Jun Vol 64(2) 173-191.

Garrioch, Lynn; Brimacombe (nee Luus), C. A. Elizabeth Lineup administrators' expectations: Their impact on eyewitness confidence. Law & Human Behavior. 2001 Jun Vol 25(3) 299-314.

Kolata, Gina And Peterson, Iver. New Way to Insure Eyewitnesses Can ID The Right Bad Guy. New York Times, July 21, 2001. 

Wells, Gary L.; Malpass, Roy S.; Lindsay, R. C. L.; Fisher, Ronald P.; Turtle, John W.; Fulero, Solomon M. From the lab to the police station: A successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist. 2000 Jun Vol 55(6) 581-598.

Brewer, Neil; Gordon, Michael; Bond, Nigel. Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategy. Psychology, Crime & Law. 2000 Vol 6(1-2) 21-32.

Winningham, Robert G.; Weaver III, Charles A. The effects of pressure to report more details on memories of an eyewitness event. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 2000 Jun Vol 12(2) 271-282.S41-S58

Pozzulo, Joanna D.; Lindsay, R. C. L Elimination lineups: An improved identification procedure for child eyewitnesses. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1999 Apr Vol 84(2) 167-176

Dutton, Anna; Carroll, Marie. Eyewitness testimony: Effects of source of arousal on memory, source-monitoring, and metamemory judgments. Australian Journal of Psychology. 2001 Aug Vol 53(2) 83-91.

Blagrove, Mark; Akehurst, Lucy. Effects of sleep loss on confidence-accuracy relationships for reasoning and eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2000 Mar Vol 6(1) 59-73.

Shaw, Jerry I.; Skolnick, Paul Weapon focus and gender differences in eyewitness accuracy: Arousal versus salience. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1999 Nov Vol 29(11) 2328-2341.

Pickel, K. L. (1998). "Unusualness and threat as possible causes of "weapon focus."" Memory 6(3): 277-295.

Mitchell, Karen J.; Zaragoza, Maria S. Contextual overlap and eyewitness suggestibility. Memory & Cognition. 2001 Jun Vol 29(4) 616-626

Sutherland, Rachel; Hayne, Harlene The effect of postevent information on adults' eyewitness reports. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2001 May Vol 15(3) 249-263.

Bjorklund, David F.; Cassel, William S.; Bjorklund, Barbara R.; Brown, Rhonda Douglas; Park, Cynthia L.; Ernst, Kim; Owen, Felicia A. Social demand characteristics in children's and adults' eyewitness memory and suggestibility: The effect of different interviewers on free recall and recognition. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2000 Sep-Oct Vol 14(5) 421-433.

Geiselman, R. Edward; Schroppel, Tammy; Tubridy, Anthony; Konishi, Tania; Rodriguez, Vanessa Objectivity bias in eyewitness performance. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2000 Jul-Aug Vol 14(4) 323-332.

Greenberg, Martin S.; Westcott, David R.; Bailey, Scott E. When believing is seeing: The effect of scripts on eyewitness memory. Law & Human Behavior. 1998 Dec Vol 22(6) 685-694

Zaragoza, Maria S.; Lane, Sean M. Processing resources and eyewitness suggestibility. Legal & Criminological Psychology. 1998 Sep Vol 3(Part 2) 305-320

Schreiber, Thomas A.; Sergent, Susan D. The role of commitment in producing misinformation effects in eyewitness memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 1998 Sep Vol 5(3) 443-448

Multhaup, Kristi S.; de Leonardis, Doreen M.; Johnson, Marcia K. Journal of General Psychology. Source memory and eyewitness suggestibility in older adults. 1999 Jan Vol 126(1) 74-84.

Blank, Hartmut Memory states and memory tasks: An integrative framework for eyewitness memory and suggestibility. Memory. 1998 Sep Vol 6(5) 481-529

Pickel, Kerri L. Distinguishing eyewitness descriptions of perceived objects from descriptions of imagined objects. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1999 Oct Vol 13(5) 399-413

Wells, Gary L.; Bradfield, Amy L. Psychological Science. Distortions in eyewitnesses' recollections: Can the postidentification-feedback effect be moderated? 1999 Mar Vol 10(2) 138-144

Wells, Gary L.; Bradfield, Amy L. "Good, you identified the suspect": Feedback to eyewitnesses distorts their reports of the witnessing experience. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1998 Jun Vol 83(3) 360-376.

Smith, Steven M.; Lindsay, R. C. L.; Pryke, Sean Postdictors of eyewitness errors: Can false identifications be diagnosed? Journal of Applied Psychology. 2000 Aug Vol 85(4) 542-550.

Woolnough, Penny S.; MacLeod, Malcolm D. Watching the birdie watching you: Eyewitness memory for actions using CCTV recording of actual crimes. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2001 Jul Vol 15(4) 395-411.

Bruce W. Behrman, Sherrie L. Davey Eyewitness Identification in Actual Criminal Cases: An Archival Analysis, Law and Human Behavior 2001 25, 475-491

Naka, Makiko The variables affecting the reliability of eyewitness testimony: Modeling after the real-world cases. Japanese Journal of Psychonomic Science. 1998 Mar Vol 16(2) 100-106
 

Penrod, S. & Cutler, B. (1995). Witness confidence and witness accuracy: Assessing their forensic relation.  Psychology, Public Policy & Law, 1, 817-845. 

Sporer, S., Penrod, S.D., Read, D. & Cutler, B.L.  (1995).  Gaining confidence in confidence: A new meta-analysis on the confidence- accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification studies.  Psychological Bulletin, 118, 315-327.

Shaw, John S., III; Zerr, Tana K.; Woythaler, Keith Public eyewitness confidence ratings can differ from those held privately. A. Law & Human Behavior. 2001 Apr Vol 25(2) 141-154 .

Granhag, Paer Anders; Stroemwall, Leif A.; Allwood, Carl Martin Effects of reiteration, hindsight bias, and memory on realism in eyewitness confidence. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2000 Sep-Oct Vol 14(5) 397-420.

Nolan, Jennifer; Markham, Roslyn The accuracy-confidence relationship in an eyewitness task: Anxiety as a modifier. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1998 Feb Vol 12(1) 43-54

Olsson, Nils. A Comparison of Correlation, Calibration, and Diagnosticity as Measures of the Confidence-Accuracy Relationship in Witness Identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, August 2000 Vol. 85, No. 4, 504-511. 

Olsson, Nils; Juslin, Peter; Winman, Anders Realism of confidence in earwitness versus eyewitness identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 1998 Jun Vol 4(2) 101-118.

Perfect, Timothy J.; Hollins, Tara S.; Hunt, Adam L. R. Practice and feedback effects on the confidence-accuracy relation in eyewitness memory. Memory. 2000 Jul Vol 8(4) 235-244.

Perfect, Timothy J.; Hollins, Tara S. Feeling-of-knowing judgments do not predict subsequent recognition performance for eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 1999 Sep Vol 5(3) 250-264.

Brewer, Neil; Potter, Rob; Fisher, Ronald P.; Bond, Nigel; Luszcz, Mary A. Beliefs and data on the relationship between consistency and accuracy of eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1999 Aug Vol 13(4) 297-313

Migueles, Malen; Garcia-Bajos, Elvira Recall, recognition, and confidence patterns in eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1999 Jun Vol 13(3) 257-268.

Skolnick, Paul; Shaw, Jerry I. Criminal Justice & Behavior. A comparison of eyewitness and physical evidence on mock-juror decision making. 2001 Oct Vol 28(5) 614-630

Ronald P.; Mello, Eileen W.; McCauley, Michelle R. Are jurors' perceptions of eyewitness credibility affected by the cognitive interview? Fisher, Psychology, Crime & Law. 1999 Vol 5(1-2) 167-176

Durham, Marcus D.; Dane, Francis C. Juror knowledge of eyewitness behavior: Evidence for the necessity of expert testimony. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality. 1999 Jun Vol 14(2) 299-308

People v. Lee, 96 N.Y.2d 157 (2001).

Yarmey, A. Daniel. Expert testimony: Does eyewitness memory research have probative value for the courts? Canadian Psychology. 2001 May Vol 42(2) 92-100.

Kassin, Saul M.; Tubb, V. Anne; Hosch, Harmon M.; Memon, Amina On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research. American Psychologist. 2001 May Vol 56(5) 405-416.

Bradfield, Amy L.; Wells, Gary L. The perceived validity of eyewitness identification testimony: A test of the five Biggers criteria. Law & Human Behavior. 2000 Oct Vol 24(5) 581-594

Shaw, John S., III; Garcia, Lisette A.; McClure, Kimberly A. A lay perspective on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1999 Jan Vol 29(1) 52-71

Memon, Amina; Wright, Daniel B. Eyewitness testimony and the Oklahoma bombing. Psychologist. 1999 Jun Vol 12(6) 292-295

Sophia I. Gatowski, Shirley A. Dobbin, James T. Richardson, Gerald P. Ginsburg, Mara L. Merlino, Veronica Dahir Asking the Gatekeepers: A National Survey of Judges on Judging Expert Evidence in a Post-Daubert World, Law and Human Behavior 2001 25, 433-458

Haber, Lyn; Haber, Ralph Norman Criteria for judging the admissibility of eyewitness testimony of long past events. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law. 1998 Dec Vol 4(4) 1135-1159.

Geiselman, R. Edward; Tubridy, Anthony; Bkynjun, Rada; Schroppel, Tammy; Turner, Luana; Yoakum, Kristen; Young, Nicole. Benton Facial Recognition Test scores: Index of eyewitness accuracy. American Journal of Forensic Psychology. 2001 Vol 19(1) 77-88

Lindholm, Torun; Christianson, Sven-Ake. Gender effects in eyewitness accounts of a violent crime. Psychology, Crime & Law. 1998 Dec Vol 4(4) 323-339

Roebers, Claudia M.; Schneider, Wolfgang . Individual differences in children's eyewitness recall: The influence of intelligence and shyness. Applied Developmental Science. 2001 Vol 5(1) 9-20.

Riske, Michelle L.; Wallace, Benjamin; Allen, Philip A Imaging ability and eyewitness accuracy. Journal of Mental Imagery. 2000 Spr-Sum Vol 24(1-2) 137-148 .

Christianson, Sven-Ake; Karlsson, Ingemar; Persson, Leif G. W. Police personnel as eyewitnesses to a violent crime. Legal & Criminological Psychology. 1998 Feb Vol 3(Part 1) 59-72

Kwong See, Sheree T.; Hoffman, Hunter G.; Wood, Tammy L Perceptions of an old female eyewitness: Is the older eyewitness believable? . Psychology & Aging. 2001 Jun Vol 16(2) 346-350.

Olsson, Nils; Juslin, Peter Can self-reported encoding strategy and recognition skill be diagnostic of performance in eyewitness identifications? Journal of Applied Psychology. 1999 Feb Vol 84(1) 42-49.

Searcy, Jean H.; Bartlett, James C.; Memon, Amina Age differences in accuracy and choosing in eyewitness identification and face recognition. Memory & Cognition. 1999 May Vol 27(3) 538-552

Yuille, John C.; Tollestrup, Patricia A.; Marxsen, David; Porter, Stephen; Herve, Hugues F. M. An exploration on the effects of marijuana on eyewitness memory. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry. 1998 Win Vol 21(1) 117-128.

Lindberg, Marc A.; Jones, Susan; McComas Collard, Lisa; Thomas, Stuart W. Similarities and differences in eyewitness testimonies of children who directly versus vicariously experience stress. Journal of Genetic Psychology. 2001 Sep Vol 162(3) 314-333

Goodman, Gail S.; Bottoms, Bette L.; Rudy, Leslie; Davis, Suzanne L.; Schwartz-Kenney, Beth M Effects of past abuse experiences on children's eyewitness memory. . Law & Human Behavior. 2001 Jun Vol 25(3) 269-298

Goodman, Gail S.; Tobey, Ann E.; Batterman-Faunce, Jennifer M.; Orcutt, Holly; Thomas, Sherry; Shapiro, Cheryl; Sachsenmaier, Toby Face-to-face confrontation: Effects of closed-circuit technology on children's eyewitness testimony and jurors' decisions. Law & Human Behavior. 1998 Apr Vol 22(2) 165-203

Mazzoni, Giuliana Memory suggestibility and metacognition in child eyewitness testimony: The roles of source monitoring and self-efficacy. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 1998 Mar Vol 13(1) 43-60

Nesbitt, Melissa; Markham, Roslyn Improving young children's accuracy of recall for an eyewitness event. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 1999 Jul-Sep Vol 20(3) 449-459.

Holliday, Robyn E.; Douglas, Karen M.; Hayes, Brett K. Childrens' eyewitness suggestibility: Memory trace strength revisited. Cognitive Development. 1999 Jul Vol 14(3) 443-462 .

Poole, Debra Ann; Lindsay, D. Stephen Children's eyewitness reports after exposure to misinformation from parents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2001 Mar Vol 7(1) 27-50.

Ricci, Christine M.; Beal, Carole R. Effect of questioning techniques and interview setting on young children's eyewitness memory. Expert Evidence. 1998 Sep Vol 6(2) 127-144

Roebers, Claudia M.; Schneider, Wolfgang.. The impact of misleading questions on eyewitness memory in children and adults. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2000 Nov-Dec Vol 14(6) 509-526

Henry, Lucy A.; Gudjonsson, Gisli H. Eyewitness memory and suggestibility in children with mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation. 1999 Nov Vol 104(6) 491-508.

Holliday, Robyn E.; Hayes, Brett K. Dissociating automatic and intentional processes in children's eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2000 Jan Vol 75(1) 1-42.

Ochsner, Joyce E.; Zaragoza, Maria S.; Mitchell, Karen J. The accuracy and suggestibility of children's memory for neutral and criminal eyewitness events. Legal & Criminological Psychology. 1999 Feb Vol 4(Part 1) 79-92

McNichol, Susan; Shute, Rosalyn; Tucker, Alison Children's eyewitness memory for a repeated event. Child Abuse & Neglect. 1999 Nov Vol 23(11) 1127-1139

Roberts, Kim P.; Blades, Mark The effects of interacting in repeated events on children's eyewitness memory and source monitoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 1998 Oct Vol 12(5) 489-503

NIH IRB training for Researchers: 

    A. go to website:http://www.rfcuny.org/ResCompliance/CBT/
    B. register 
    C. take the course
    D. pass the little test and
    E. print your certificate (save it disk as well, if possible)  -- we may need to produce copies of these certificates for everyone

(Past Assignments)