Eyewitness recognition errors: The effects of mugshot viewing and choosing in young and old adults

Memon, Amina; Hope, Lorraine; Bartlett, James C.; Bull, Ray

doi:10.3758/bf03213404

Cited by 72 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 54 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In culprit-absent conditions, 16% changed their decisions to make an innocent suspect selection. Similar carryover effects have been found in previous research (e.g., Deffenbacher et al, 2006;Dysart et al, 2001;Haw et al, 2007;Memon et al, 2002). In real cases, a person identified in a showup is likely to be arrested.…”

Section: Repeated Identification Proceduressupporting

confidence: 67%

Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line‐up

Valentine

Davis

Memon

et al. 2011

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A live showup (known as a street identification in the UK) allows the perpetrator to be identified shortly after a street crime. If the suspect disputes the identification, a video lineup often ensues. Four experiments examined the reliability of live showups and their influence on a subsequent video lineup using realistic procedures and conditions. Similar proportions of culprits and innocent suspects were identified from live showups and video lineups. Both culprits and innocent suspects previously identified were likely to be identified again in a subsequent lineup, with delays from a few minutes to a month. Only a weak effect of clothing bias was observed. There was strong evidence of commitment to a previous identification, but no reliable evidence of source monitoring errors. The results suggest that a live showup is not less fair than a lineup, but use of repeated identification procedures introduces an unfair bias against innocent suspects.Live showups and video lineups 4

show abstract

Section: Repeated Identification Proceduressupporting

confidence: 67%

Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line‐up

Valentine

Davis

Memon

et al. 2011

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding should be interpreted with caution, though, because the young and older groups were also equivalent in discriminability, so this study does not tell us whether older adults can assess the accuracy of their memories to the same extent as young adults when their memory ability is worse. Nevertheless, many other eyewitness studies have found that older adults tend to assign lower confidence ratings to their identification decisions on average than young adults, which may suggest that older adults are aware that they are less accurate (Goodsell, Neuschatz, & Gronlund, 2009;Memon et al, 2002;Neuschatz et al, 2005;Searcy et al, 2001;Wylie et al, 2015; but see Havard & Memon, 2009;Searcy et al, 1999). If middle-aged and older adults are able to gauge the likely accuracy of their memories, then they should be as accurate as young adults at each level of confidence, despite any decline in memory ability that occurs with age.…”

Section: Gauging the Accuracy Of Identificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some lineup studies have found that accuracy and confidence are better correlated in young people than in older people (Adams-Price, 1992;Memon, Hope, Bartlett, & Bull, 2002;Wylie et al, 2015), and a recent review concluded that confidence should not be used as a proxy for accuracy in older adults (Erickson, Lampinen, & Moore, 2015). Also, older adults often make highconfidence errors (Dodson, Bawa, & Krueger, 2007;Dodson, Bawa, & Slotnick, 2007;Dodson & Krueger, 2006), and older adults who rate their memory self-efficacy as higher are more likely to make false identifications (Searcy et al, 2000;Searcy et al, 2001).…”

Section: Gauging the Accuracy Of Identificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of the lineup studies (e.g., Adams-Price, 1992; Memon et al, 2002;Wylie et al, 2015) have calculated the correlation coefficient, yet a low correlation coefficient does not necessarily indicate a poor relationship between confidence and accuracy (Juslin, Olsson, & Winman, 1996). Correlation coefficients reflect the relationship between categorical confidence judgments (0, 10, 20, etc.…”

Section: Gauging the Accuracy Of Identificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A signal-detection analysis of eyewitness identification across the adult lifespan.

Colloff

Wade

Wixted

et al. 2017

Psychology and Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2017) A signal-detection analysis of eyewitness identification across the adult lifespan. Psychology and Aging, 32 (3). pp. 243-258. Permanent WRAP URL:http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/85985 Copyright and reuse:The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way.Publisher's statement: © 2017, American Psychological Association. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors permission. The final article will be available, upon publication, via its DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pag0000168 A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP URL' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. Middle-aged and older adults are frequently victims and witnesses of crime, but knowledge of how identification performance changes over the adult lifespan is sparse. We asked young (18-30 years), middle-aged (31-59 years) and older (60-95 years) adults (N = 2,670) to watch a video of a mock crime and to attempt to identify the culprit from a fair lineup (in which all of the lineup members matched the appearance of the suspect) or an unfair lineup (in which the suspect stood out). We also asked subjects to provide confidence ratings for their identification decisions. To examine identification performance, we used a standard response-type analysis, receiver operating characteristic analysis, and signal-detection process modeling. The results revealed that, in fair lineups, aging was associated with a genuine decline in recognition ability-discriminability-and not an increased willingness to choose. Perhaps most strikingly, middle-aged and older adults were generally effective at regulating their confidence judgments to reflect the likely accuracy of their suspect identification decisions. Model-fitting confirmed that the older adults spread their decision criteria such that identifications made with high confidence were likely to be highly accurate, despite the substantial decline in discriminability with age. In unfair lineups, ability to discriminate between innocent and guilty suspects was poor in all a...

show abstract

“…A second mechanism involves context-free familiarity (Memon, Hope, Bartlett, & Bull, 2002). By this account, having previously viewed a mugshot causes one to experience a vague feeling of familiarity when one sees that face again, in the absence of recollection of the context in which that face was previously encountered.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feelings of familiarity and false memory for specific associations resulting from mugshot exposure

Kersten

Earles

2016

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research reveals that mugshot viewing accompanied by questions about an action can cause young adults to associate the pictured person and the queried action, leading to later false recollection of having seen that person perform that action. In contrast, mugshot viewing in older adults can lead to vague feelings of familiarity for the pictured person, encouraging older adults to later falsely recognize the pictured person performing any familiar action. Participants viewed events involving actors performing different actions and then were asked verbal questions about which actor had performed each action, with each question accompanied by mugshots of potential "perpetrators" of the action. In a later recognition test, older adults were more likely to falsely recognize a novel conjunction of a familiar actor and action if they had seen a mugshot of that actor, regardless of whether the mugshot had accompanied a question about that action. In contrast, young adults were more likely to falsely recognize a conjunction event only if it involved an actor whose mugshot had accompanied a question about that particular action. This effect remained when the analysis was limited to trials involving actors whose mugshots had not been previously selected, implicating false recollection rather than commitment effects.

show abstract

Eyewitness recognition errors: The effects of mugshot viewing and choosing in young and old adults

Cited by 72 publications

References 54 publications

Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line‐up

Live Showups and Their Influence on a Subsequent Video Line‐up

A signal-detection analysis of eyewitness identification across the adult lifespan.

Feelings of familiarity and false memory for specific associations resulting from mugshot exposure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About