The Effect of Facial Composite Construction on Eyewitness Identification Accuracy in an Ecologically Valid Paradigm

Abstract

Previous research has produced equivocal results with regard to whether facial composite creation affects subsequent eyewitness identification accuracy, but the most widely publicized view is that creating a composite impairs the ability to later recognize the perpetrator from a line-up. In our first experiment, we examined this effect using several ecologically valid elements including a live staged crime, trained police officers, and a long delay between construction and identification, albeit with only a short delay between crime and composite construction. Composite construction did not significantly affect line-up identification accuracy. Experiment 2 replicated this result using a laboratory-based design and sequential line-up task, eliminating the possibly confounding effect of differential levels of motivation and relative judgments. Taken together, the experiments suggest composite creation may not negatively impact subsequent line-up accuracy, regardless of whether an ecologically valid method or more standard laboratory testing was used.

Digital Detectives: Websleuthing Reduces Eyewitness Identification Accuracy in Police Lineups

“…However, the finding that seeing a lookalike on social media reduces correct identification by over 30% is dramatic compared to other studies (Memon et al, 2011). Unlike some previous research (e.g., Davis et al, 2014), that has found composite construction leads to a higher rate of correct identifications compared to a control, our results were more similar to the majority of composite research (Pike G. E. et al, 2019;Tredoux et al, 2020) in finding no significant improvement in correct identifications between the Culprit and Control conditions. Jenkins et al (2011) study could offer some insight into our results.…”

“…This has real-world importance because 27% of eyewitness misidentifications reported by the Innocence Project (n.d.) involved facial composite sketches. However, although some studies have shown impaired identification performance following composite construction (e.g., Wells et al, 2005 ), others have found that identification accuracy improved (e.g., Davis et al, 2014 ) with most research tending to find no effect (e.g., Pike G. E. et al, 2019 ; Pike G. et al, 2019 ). A meta-analysis of this research revealed no significant negative effects of composite construction (Tredoux et al, 2020 ), although it is possible that exposure to a composite created by someone else may have a negative effect if the suspect and composite image share the same misleading feature, or either a positive or no effect if the composite is a more accurate representation (Sporer et al, 2020 ).…”

Advances in Facial Composite Technology, Utilizing Holistic Construction, Do Not Lead to an Increase in Eyewitness Misidentifications Compared to Older Feature-Based Systems

“…“No effect” in this case suggests that the same witness can be asked both to create a composite of the perpetrator and attempt to identify that perpetrator in an identification procedure, without the former interfering with the latter. Pike et al (2019) drew a similar conclusion but pointed out that the delay between composite creation and seeing a lineup is often much shorter in experimental work than in a real case, so that care needs to be taken in translating the results. Even though a relatively long delay was employed in the current study, in a real case, the delay may be longer still; so again, care is needed in translating the results to practice.…”

“…Previous research has been conducted to explore what effect creating a composite, mostly using feature-based systems (e.g., Photofit or E-FIT), might have on subsequent eyewitness identification performance, and the results have not been consistent. Some studies have found that composite production interferes negatively with later identification accuracy (Wells et al, 2005; Topp-Manriquez et al, 2016), some that it does not have any significant effect (Yu and Geiselman, 1993; Davis et al, 2016; Pike et al, 2019), and some that it actually has a positive effect (Meissner and Brigham, 2001; Davis et al, 2014). Tredoux et al (2016) conducted a meta-analysis of the research exploring the effect composite production might have on subsequent performance at an eyewitness identification procedure and concluded that creating a composite does not appear to have a statistically significant effect.…”

From Witness to Web Sleuth: Does Citizen Enquiry on Social Media Affect Formal Eyewitness Identification Procedures?

“…Wells et al 2005), the majority of studies have either reported no effect (e.g. Pike et al 2020Pike et al , 2019 or even a beneficial effect (e.g. Davis et al 2014), and a recent meta-analysis concluded that composite construction does not appear to affect lineup decision (Tredoux et al 2020).…”