Exploring the sequential lineup advantage using WITNESS.

Abstract

Advocates claim that the sequential lineup is an improvement over simultaneous lineup procedures, but no formal (quantitatively specified) explanation exists for why it is better. The computational model WITNESS (Clark, Appl Cogn Psychol 17:629-654, 2003) was used to develop theoretical explanations for the sequential lineup advantage. In its current form, WITNESS produced a sequential advantage only by pairing conservative sequential choosing with liberal simultaneous choosing. However, this combination failed to approximate four extant experiments that exhibited large sequential advantages. Two of these experiments became the focus of our efforts because the data were uncontaminated by likely suspect position effects. Decision-based and memory-based modifications to WITNESS approximated the data and produced a sequential advantage. The next step is to evaluate the proposed explanations and modify public policy recommendations accordingly.

A signal-detection-based diagnostic-feature-detection model of eyewitness identification.

“…Theoretically, we propose that this result occurred because, by the time the participant reached Position 5 without having yet chosen anyone, the non-diagnostic features were as clear to the participant as they would have been had the faces been shown simultaneously. Goodsell, Gronlund, and Carlson (2010) considered the possibility that a witness might rely on more diagnostic features as a sequential lineup unfolds (just as we are suggesting). Our diagnostic feature-detection hypothesis goes beyond that by offering an explanation of how it is that witnesses become aware of what the more diagnostic features are during the course of sequential testing (viz., by taking note of common features, which are then discounted).…”

Advances in Psychology and Law

“…Another prediction that arises from the Wixted and Mickes ( 2014 ) theory is that an eyewitness in a sequential lineup can determine what characteristics are diagnostic after viewing several lineup members (see also Goodsell, Gronlund, & Carlson, 2010 ). For example, while viewing lineup member #1, a witness notes that the ears match the perpetrator but the nose is too big.…”

Metacognitive Control and Lineup Instructions: Asking eyewitnesses to recollect reduces false identification

“…However, while sequential presentation can discourage overly liberal choosing (Palmer & Brewer, 2012), it does not improve discriminability (Wixted et al, 2016), suggesting it does not improve recollection. In comparison, simultaneous presentation offers potential benefits for memory retrieval, such as multiple concurrent cues and the opportunity for comparisons that could highlight diagnostic features for evaluating guilt (Goodsell, Gronlund, & Carlson, 2010;Wixted & Mickes, 2014;Wixted, Vul, Mickes, & Wilson, 2018).…”