Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence.

Wells, Gary L.; Kovera, Margaret Bull; Douglass, Amy Bradfield; Brewer, Neil; Meissner, Christian A.; Wixted, John T.

doi:10.1037/lhb0000359

Cited by 219 publications

(444 citation statements)

References 273 publications

(337 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

428

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of conducting extensive research on these issues have led to incorporation of a series of evidence‐based practices that may help mitigate such errors. For example, psychological researchers have found that changes to eyewitness identification procedures—double‐blind administration, specific witness instructions, proper lineup construction, and so forth—may reduce the likelihood that witnesses mistakenly pick the wrong person out of a lineup or photo array (Wells et al., ; Wells, et al., ). Furthermore, interrogation experts have recommended changes such as limiting the length of interrogation sessions (e.g., Bull, ; Leo, ) and video‐recording interrogations as measures to reduce the likelihood of excessive coercion and help guard against false confessions (Kassin et al., ).…”

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The criminal costs of wrongful convictions

Norris

Weintraub

Acker

et al. 2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary:In this article, we examine criminal offending by true perpetrators after innocent people are arrested and convicted for their crimes. After investigating a set of cases in which DNA was used to exonerate the innocent and to identify the guilty party, we identified 109 true perpetrators, 102 of whom committed additional crimes. We found a total of 337 additional offenses committed by the true perpetrators, including 43 homicide-related and 94 sex offenses. By extrapolating from our findings, we estimate that the wrong-person wrongful convictions that occur annually may lead to more than 41,000 additional crimes. Policy Implications:Our findings indicate that one consequence of wrongful convictions, allowing the true perpetrators of crimes to remain at liberty and commit new crimes that imperil prospective victims, represents an important threat to public safety and thereby dramatically compounds the harms caused to innocents. We stress the importance of framing wrongful conviction issues to capture these important crime control concerns and, thus, to help galvanize public opinion and promote policy reforms that will mutually benefit adherents of both crime control and due process perspectives. K E Y W O R D Scrime control, due process, exoneration, framing, innocence, miscarriage of justice, true perpetrator, wrongful conviction, wrongful liberty

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The criminal costs of wrongful convictions

Norris

Weintraub

Acker

et al. 2019

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Guidelines in the United States recommend a minimum of five fillers (Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence, ; Wells et al, ) and most police agencies appear to conform to this practice, however some agencies have reported only using two fillers whereas others use as many as 11 (Police Executive Research Forum, 2013). The variability across jurisdictions is reasonable given the lack of consistent empirical evidence to inform policymakers about what the optimal filler number should be.…”

Section: Diagnostic Feature‐detection Prediction Concerning Showups Amentioning

confidence: 99%

The number of fillers may not matter as long as they all match the description: The effect of simultaneous lineup size on eyewitness identification

Wooten

Carlson

Lockamyeir

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the Diagnostic Feature-Detection (DFD) hypothesis, the presence of fillers that match the eyewitness's description of the perpetrator will boost discriminability beyond a showup, and very few fillers may suffice to produce the advantage.We tested this hypothesis by comparing showups with simultaneous lineups of size 3, 6, 9, and 12. Participants (N = 10,433) were randomly assigned to one of these conditions, as well as target-present (TP) versus target-absent (TA) lineup. As predicted by the DFD hypothesis, lineups were superior to showups, and there was no advantage with increased lineup size beyond a 3-member lineup. The confidenceaccuracy (CA) relationship held a similar pattern. The only effect of increased lineup size was a lower likelihood of choosing a suspect (guilty or innocent). We conclude that police should focus more on the quality rather than quantity of fillers. K E Y W O R D S diagnostic feature-detection hypothesis, eyewitness identification, lineup size, showups, simultaneous lineup

show abstract

“…Studies should carefully manipulate and pilot‐test the similarity of composites to designated suspects in TA lineups, and analyze mix‐ups, rather than simply reporting hits and filler identifications in TP lineups. In line with current identification practice recommendations, post‐decision confidence should be assessed immediately after an identification decision, and the whole procedure should be videotaped (Sporer, 1992b; Wells et al, 2019). Analyses should focus on responses by choosers, and newer confidence calibration analyses and CAC curves could also be considered for analysis (Brewer, Weber, & Guerin, 2019; Mickes, 2015; Wixted & Wells, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does exposure to facial composites damage eyewitness memory? A comprehensive review

Sporer

Tredoux

Vredeveldt

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Eyewitnesses often create face likenesses, which are published in the hope that potential suspects will be reported to the police. Witnesses exposed to another witness's composite, however, may be positively or negatively influenced by such composites. A good likeness may facilitate identification, but a bad likeness that resembles an innocent suspect may lead to a misidentification (“mix‐up”). We offer a theoretical review, and comprehensively summarize extant studies descriptively because most studies did not report enough statistical details to warrant a formal meta‐analysis. Some studies showed negative exposure effects, particularly when the innocent suspect and composite shared misleading features. Studies that exposed witnesses to “good” composites reported positive or no effects on lineup performance, and some highly powered studies also showed no effect. We outline suggestions for further investigations under ecologically valid conditions. We also make recommendations for investigative practice, and the evaluation of identification evidence by fact finders or courts.

show abstract

Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence.

Abstract: Theoretical vs. empirical discriminability: The application of ROC methods to eyewitness identification.

Cited by 219 publications

References 273 publications

The criminal costs of wrongful convictions

The criminal costs of wrongful convictions

The number of fillers may not matter as long as they all match the description: The effect of simultaneous lineup size on eyewitness identification

Does exposure to facial composites damage eyewitness memory? A comprehensive review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About