eCite Digital Repository
Eyewitness identifications of multiple culprits: disconfirming feedback following one lineup decision impairs identification of another culprit
Citation
Palmer, MA and Brewer, N and Weber, N and Sauer, JD, Eyewitness identifications of multiple culprits: disconfirming feedback following one lineup decision impairs identification of another culprit, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law pp. 1-14. ISSN 1076-8971 (2020) [Refereed Article]
Copyright Statement
Copyright 2020 American Psychological Association
Abstract
Eyewitnesses to multiple-culprit crimes are often asked to try to identify the culprits from different
lineups during a police investigation. In 2 experiments (N = 557), we show that disconfirming feedback
after an identification attempt for 1 culprit can impair identification performance on a subsequent lineup
for a different culprit. In each experiment, witnesses viewed a simulated, 2-culprit crime, followed by 2
police lineups: A culprit-absent lineup for 1 culprit and either a culprit-present or culprit-absent lineup
for the second culprit. Following the first lineup, witnesses received disconfirming feedback or no
feedback. For witnesses who correctly rejected the first lineup, disconfirming feedback impaired
identification performance on the subsequent lineup. For witnesses who incorrectly chose someone from
the first lineup, disconfirming feedback impaired subsequent performance when the feedback unambiguously implied poor ability to identify the culprit in the first identification test (Experiment 2) but not
when it could have been interpreted as implying poor criterion setting (Experiment 1). Across both
experiments, disconfirming feedback also reduced the difference in confidence between correct and
incorrect identifications. These results add to evidence that postidentification feedback can affect
subsequent identification performance by influencing witnesses’ beliefs about their ability to identify a
culprit. Current policy recommendations state that postidentification feedback should be withheld from
witnesses until confidence has been documented. These should be updated to recommend withholding
feedback for longer if the witness may be asked to view additional lineups, and to ensure that lineup
administrators are blind to the results of any previous lineups.
Item Details
Item Type: | Refereed Article |
---|---|
Keywords: | eyewitness identification, multiple culprits, multiple lineups, postidentification feedback, compound signal detection |
Research Division: | Psychology |
Research Group: | Applied and developmental psychology |
Research Field: | Forensic psychology |
Objective Division: | Expanding Knowledge |
Objective Group: | Expanding knowledge |
Objective Field: | Expanding knowledge in psychology |
UTAS Author: | Palmer, MA (Associate Professor Matt Palmer) |
UTAS Author: | Sauer, JD (Associate Professor Jim Sauer) |
ID Code: | 141990 |
Year Published: | 2020 |
Funding Support: | Australian Research Council (DP140103746) |
Web of Science® Times Cited: | 3 |
Deposited By: | Psychology |
Deposited On: | 2020-12-07 |
Last Modified: | 2021-04-26 |
Downloads: | 0 |
Repository Staff Only: item control page