Predicting High Confidence Errors in Eyewitness Memory: The Role of Face Recognition Ability, Decision-Time, and Justifications

Grabman, Jesse H.; Dobolyi, David G.; Berelovich, Nathan L.; Dodson, Chad S.

doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.02.002

Cited by 35 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They found that a large majority (80%) preferred to express their confidence verbally rather than numerically. This result is consistent with prior research (e.g., Behrman & Richards, 2005) and has since been replicated by Grabman, Dobolyi, Berelovich, and Dodson (2019) who found that 78% of participants had that preference.…”

supporting

confidence: 92%

“…To preface our results, we find that eyewitness confidence statements contain rich diagnostic information, replicating Dobolyi and Dodson (2018), Grabman et al (2019) and others (e.g., Behrman & Richards, 2005;Mansour, 2020). Even more noteworthy, we find that eyewitness confidence statements contain unique diagnostic information that is not otherwise captured by traditional indicators of identification accuracy, such as numeric confidence ratings.…”

Section: The Current Studysupporting

confidence: 73%

“…To illustrate how the classifier works, we apply it to laboratory data from a forensicallyrelevant experiment investigating the effect of face recognition ability on the strength of the confidence-accuracy relationship (Grabman, Dobolyi, Berelovich, & Dodson, 2019). These data were chosen because a sufficient number of eyewitness confidence statements were collected (in order to train the classifier) and because we wanted to explore the relationship between face recognition ability and the ability to provide a diagnostic verbal confidence statement.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there is much information about the value that confidence holds when a rating scale is used, less is known about the diagnostic value that verbal confidence statements hold (Behrman & Richards, 2005;Cash & Lane, 2017;Dobolyi & Dodson, 2018;Dodson & Dobolyi, 2015;Grabman, Dobolyi, Berelovich, & Dodson, 2019;Klobuchar, Steblay, & Caliguiri, 2006;Mansour, 2020). This is why Wixted and Wells (2017) highlighted this as a priority for future research, about which they asked: Should a confidence statement be taken in the witness's own words (as in Klobuchar et al, 2006), or should confidence be recorded using an explicit 3-point rating scale (as in Wixted et al, 2016) -or should a 100-point scale be used?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The language of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses

Seale-Carlisle¹,

Grabman²,

Dodson³

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the best method for collecting an eyewitness’s level of confidence? In an attempt to answer this question, we used the machine-learning methodology applied by Dobbins and Kantner (2019) to investigate the natural language of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses. This method followed a “bag of words” approach which treated each individual word in an eyewitness confidence statement as a potentially predictive feature of identification accuracy. In contrast to previous investigations (e.g., Behrman & Richards, 2005), this method provided a much more fine-grained analysis of eyewitness verbal confidence statements. We find that verbal confidence statements contain much diagnostic information. Even more noteworthy, we find that verbal confidence statements contain unique diagnostic information that is not already captured by traditional indicators of identification accuracy such as numeric confidence ratings. However, the diagnostic value of a verbal confidence statement depends in part on the face recognition ability of the eyewitness: strong face recognizers provide more diagnostic verbal confidence statements than weak face recognizers. Together, these results shed important theoretical light on the relationship between language and memory. Moreover, the machine-learning methodology used in this study may help actors in the criminal justice system accurately interpret an eyewitness's verbal confidence statement.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 92%

Section: The Current Studysupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The language of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses

Seale-Carlisle¹,

Grabman²,

Dodson³

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the research here further supports the recommendation for documenting a contemporaneous statement of confidence and documenting the time the witness took to make the identification. It may also be useful to ask witnesses to explain the basis of their recognition judgment as this may moderate the confidence—accuracy relationship (Grabman, Dobolyi, Berelovich, & Dodson, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing detailed and less detailed pre‐lineup instructions

Lampinen

Race

Wolf

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary It is generally agreed that proper pre‐lineup instructions can reduce the rate of mistaken identifications of innocent suspects. However, the exact nature of these instructions has not been empirically established. We compared the effects of the detailed pre‐lineup instructions recommended by the US Department of Justice to a simple instruction that the perpetrator may or may not be present. Both forms of unbiased instructions significantly reduced mistaken identifications when compared with biased instructions. Comparison of performance using the utility‐based analysis deviation from perfect performance demonstrated that unbiased instructions are to be preferred under assumptions of low base rates or high costs of mistaken identifications and do as well as biased instructions under assumptions of high base rates or low cost of misidentification.

show abstract

“In your own words, how certain are you?” Post‐identification feedback distorts verbal and numeric expressions of eyewitness confidence

Kenchel

Greenspan

Reisberg

et al. 2021

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary After making a lineup identification, eyewitnesses remember being more confident in their identification and having a better view of the initial crime if they are told they correctly identified the suspect compared to witnesses not given this feedback. The present studies investigated whether this effect of feedback occurs similarly when witnesses report their confidence numerically and when they report their confidence in their own words. Across three studies, participants (N = 1396) watched a mock crime video, received either confirmatory feedback or not, and reported their confidence in words, numbers, or both words and numbers. Results showed a significant effect of feedback on both confidence and witnessed experience in all confidence conditions. This effect occurred with both biased and unbiased lineup instructions and with both target‐present and target‐absent lineups. The results advance discussions about the best means for reporting confidence in the field.

show abstract

Predicting High Confidence Errors in Eyewitness Memory: The Role of Face Recognition Ability, Decision-Time, and Justifications

Cited by 35 publications

References 30 publications

The language of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses

The language of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses

Comparing detailed and less detailed pre‐lineup instructions

“In your own words, how certain are you?” Post‐identification feedback distorts verbal and numeric expressions of eyewitness confidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About