Abstract:Eyewitness identifications play an important role in the investigation and prosecution of crimes, but it is well known that eyewitnesses make mistakes, often with serious consequences. In light of these concerns, the National Academy of Sciences recently convened a panel of experts to undertake a comprehensive study of current practice and use of eyewitness testimony, with an eye toward understanding why identification errors occur and what can be done to prevent them. The work of this committee led to key fin… Show more
“…At basic sensory and perceptual levels, physiology and cognitive psychology research reveals that previous, conventional models of the visual system as a “camera,” faithfully recording the outside world, are incorrect. Instead, cognitive research demonstrates that visual perception is largely “constructive,” with the brain “filling in” gaps in a scene or a face .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is a crucial distinction, well described by Albright:Sensations themselves are evanescent; only a small fraction of what is sensed is actually perceived. […] Perception is the process by which attended visual information is integrated, linked to environmental cause, made coherent, and categorized through the assignment of meaning, utility, value, and emotional valence .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, human cognitive attention and visual perception have limitations including physiological and cognitive restrictions. In diverse domains such as clinical diagnosis, EI, or even daily life decisions, we stop questioning misfitting pieces of evidence if an already coherent picture is emerging . Visual information, especially during a crime, is often “noisy.” Multiple factors such as poor lighting, brief temporal exposure, or disguises limit the ability of the victim to accurately perceive an assailant's face.…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detecting the fleeting appearance of a walking gorilla among ballplayers, or an embedded gorilla outline on a chest tomography (three‐dimensional x‐ray image) is very hard to discern . Albright's pithy statement concerning EI reads:“This same system that grants certainty of perceptual experience in the face of noise is also capable of filling in the blanks with the wrong information .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…“This same system that grants certainty of perceptual experience in the face of noise is also capable of filling in the blanks with the wrong information .…”
Previously, we reviewed how general cognitive processes might be susceptible to bias across both forensic and clinical fields, and how interdisciplinary comparisons could reduce error. We discuss several examples of clinical tasks which are heavily dependent on visual processing, comparing them to eyewitness identification (EI). We review the "constructive" nature of visual processing, and how contextual factors influence both medical experts and witnesses in decision making and recall. Overall, studies suggest common cognitive factors uniting these visual tasks, in both their strengths and shortcomings. Recently forensic sciences have advocated reducing errors by identifying and controlling nonrelevant information. Such efforts could effectively assist medical diagnosis. We suggest potential remedies for cognitive bias in these tasks. These can generalize across the clinical and forensic domains, including controlling the sequencing of contextual factors. One solution is an agnostic primary reading before incorporation of a complete history and interpretation.
“…At basic sensory and perceptual levels, physiology and cognitive psychology research reveals that previous, conventional models of the visual system as a “camera,” faithfully recording the outside world, are incorrect. Instead, cognitive research demonstrates that visual perception is largely “constructive,” with the brain “filling in” gaps in a scene or a face .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is a crucial distinction, well described by Albright:Sensations themselves are evanescent; only a small fraction of what is sensed is actually perceived. […] Perception is the process by which attended visual information is integrated, linked to environmental cause, made coherent, and categorized through the assignment of meaning, utility, value, and emotional valence .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, human cognitive attention and visual perception have limitations including physiological and cognitive restrictions. In diverse domains such as clinical diagnosis, EI, or even daily life decisions, we stop questioning misfitting pieces of evidence if an already coherent picture is emerging . Visual information, especially during a crime, is often “noisy.” Multiple factors such as poor lighting, brief temporal exposure, or disguises limit the ability of the victim to accurately perceive an assailant's face.…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detecting the fleeting appearance of a walking gorilla among ballplayers, or an embedded gorilla outline on a chest tomography (three‐dimensional x‐ray image) is very hard to discern . Albright's pithy statement concerning EI reads:“This same system that grants certainty of perceptual experience in the face of noise is also capable of filling in the blanks with the wrong information .…”
Section: Cognitive Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…“This same system that grants certainty of perceptual experience in the face of noise is also capable of filling in the blanks with the wrong information .…”
Previously, we reviewed how general cognitive processes might be susceptible to bias across both forensic and clinical fields, and how interdisciplinary comparisons could reduce error. We discuss several examples of clinical tasks which are heavily dependent on visual processing, comparing them to eyewitness identification (EI). We review the "constructive" nature of visual processing, and how contextual factors influence both medical experts and witnesses in decision making and recall. Overall, studies suggest common cognitive factors uniting these visual tasks, in both their strengths and shortcomings. Recently forensic sciences have advocated reducing errors by identifying and controlling nonrelevant information. Such efforts could effectively assist medical diagnosis. We suggest potential remedies for cognitive bias in these tasks. These can generalize across the clinical and forensic domains, including controlling the sequencing of contextual factors. One solution is an agnostic primary reading before incorporation of a complete history and interpretation.
Few earlier studies have investigated the effects of highly stressful, realistic, violent, and threatening scenarios on eyewitness identification accuracy in an ecologically valid setting. The majority of studies have relied on laboratory‐based simulated (videos/images) experiments. The present study investigated line‐up accuracy approximately 1 week after a hostage simulation event. We administered biased line‐up instructions to 50% of participants to investigate how this impacted choosing behaviour and accuracy. Based on 1030 line‐up decisions (N = 122), we found that average accuracy was 38% in target present (TP) and 54% in target absent (TA) line‐ups and that biased line‐up instructions decreased overall accuracy (vs. unbiased). The hit rate for TP line‐ups with biased instructions was 0.43 (unbiased instructions: 0.33), while the false alarm rate for TA line‐ups with biased instructions was 0.60 (unbiased instructions: 0.32). We found that high confidence was associated with correct identifications and that shorter response times were indicative of correct rejections. Our findings demonstrate, in a more realistic scenario than the majority of eyewitness identification studies, the effect that biased line‐up instructions lead to increased choosing and decreased accuracy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
