The Influence of Perpetrator Exposure Time and Weapon Presence/Timing on Eyewitness Confidence and Accuracy

Carlson, Curt A.; Young, David F.; Weatherford, Dawn R.; Carlson, Maria A.; Bednarz, Jane; Jones, Alyssa R.

doi:10.1002/acp.3275

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also considered that it is likely for eyewitnesses to only see the perpetrator's face for a brief period of time. For example, the perpetrator may only turn toward the eyewitness for a short period of time or the eyewitness may enter the crime situation seconds prior to the perpetrator escaping (see Carlson et al, 2016, for two real world examples).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“All I remember is the black eye”: A distinctive facial feature harms eyewitness identification

Jones

Carlson

Lockamyeir

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many crimes occur in which a perpetrator has a distinctive facial feature, such as a tattoo or black eye, but few eyewitness identification (ID) studies have involved such a feature. We conducted an experiment to determine how eyewitness ID performance is impacted by a distinctive facial feature, and how police could deal with this issue. Participants (N = 4,218) studied a target face with or without a black eye, and later viewed a simultaneous photo lineup either containing the target or not. For those who saw a target with a black eye, this feature was either replicated among all lineup members or was removed. The black eye harmed empirical discriminability regardless of replication or removal, which did not differ. However, participants responded more conservatively when the black eye was removed, compared to replication. Lastly, immediate confidence was consistently indicative of accuracy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“All I remember is the black eye”: A distinctive facial feature harms eyewitness identification

Jones

Carlson

Lockamyeir

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A consistent finding is that estimator variable manipulations largely do not negatively impact the overall CA relationship. Indeed, manipulations of weapon presence (Carlson, Dias, Weatherford, & Carlson, 2017), exposure time (Carlson et al, 2016; Palmer, Brewer, Weber, & Nagesh, 2013), retention interval (Sauer, Brewer, Zweck, & Weber, 2010), and race (Dodson & Dobolyi, 2016) have all shown that regardless of condition, accuracy increases with confidence, and highly confident eyewitnesses tend to be highly accurate.…”

Section: The Confidence–accuracy Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of viewing distance on empirical discriminability and the confidence–accuracy relationship for eyewitness identification

Lockamyeir

Carlson

Jones

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The distance from which an eyewitness views a perpetrator is a critical factor for eyewitness identification, but has received little research attention. We presented three mock‐crime videos to participants, varying distance to three perpetrators (3, 10, or 20 m). Across two experiments, increased distance reduced empirical discriminability in the form of a mirror effect, such that correct identifications decreased while false identifications increased. Moreover, high confidence identifications were associated with high accuracy at 3 m (Experiment 1 and 2) and 10 m (Experiment 2), but not at 20 m. We conclude that eyewitnesses may be less likely to identify a perpetrator viewed at a distance, and also more likely to falsely identify an innocent suspect. Furthermore, there may be certain boundary conditions associated with distance and the impact it has on the confidence–accuracy relationship. More research is needed to elucidate the effect of estimator variable manipulations on the confidence–accuracy relationship.

show abstract

“…Overall, recent research examining the CA relationship has found that confidence is a good postdictor of accuracy for those who make a positive identification from a lineup. Contrary to the optimality hypothesis, the relation between CA remains strong across both short and longer exposure times (Carlson et al, 2016;Palmer et al, 2013).…”

Section: Confidence-accuracy Relationshipcontrasting

confidence: 86%

“…Using the calibration approach, Carlson and colleagues (2016) found that increased exposure time resulted in better calibration (i.e., C values closer to 0) for choosers, however the differences were not statistically significant. These findings suggest that the CA relationship can be robust across a number of estimator variables (e.g., exposure time and presence of a weapon; Carlson et al, 2016).…”

Section: Confidence-accuracy Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…If the confidence-accuracy relationship has perfect calibration, for example, eyewitnesses who make decisions with 70% confidence are likely to be correct 70% of the time. The calibration approach is considered to be more informative than the correlation approach, as it provides additional information on the reliability of identifications across the different categorical levels of confidence (Brewer & Wells, 2006;Carlson et al, 2016). As a result, the calibration approach can provide information on the likelihood that the identification is reliable at each level of confidence, which is not possible using the correlation approach.…”

Section: Confidence-accuracy Relationshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identification Accuracy of Adolescent Eyewitnesses: The Role of Familiarity and Lineup Procedure

Sheahan¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the current study was to examine the role of familiarity and lineup procedure on eyewitness identification accuracy. Familiarity was manipulated wherein adolescent participants (N = 623): (1) met with and directly interacted with a confederate, (2) indirectly interacted with a confederate, or (3) did not meet a confederate, before they viewed a crime video in which the confederate was the perpetrator. Three commonly used lineup procedures (i.e., simultaneous, sequential, and elimination-plus) were used, and the presence of the target also was manipulated. Overall, familiarity and lineup procedure impacted identification accuracy, such that in target-present lineups, witnesses were more likely to make a correct identification when they were more familiar (i.e., had direct interaction) with the perpetrator and the sequential procedure was used. Furthermore, in target-absent lineups, witnesses were more likely to make a correct rejection when they were more familiar (i.e., had direct interaction) with the perpetrator and the simultaneous or elimination-plus procedure was used. Taken together, these findings suggest that familiarity, in terms of having a direct interaction with a perpetrator before the commission of a crime, positively influences identification accuracy. Furthermore, these findings provide new, important information regarding the simultaneous-sequential debate and the utility of commonly used lineup procedures when the witness is familiar with the perpetrator. FAMILIARITY AND LINEUP PROCEDURE iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank a number of people who have assisted with the completion of this project. First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Joanna Pozzulo for your unwavering support, guidance, and feedback throughout this process and my time at Carleton University. I am extremely grateful for all of the hours you have spent mentoring me and providing valuable feedback. You have provided me with a number of amazing opportunities to learn how to be a researcher, teacher, and mentor. Without your support, encouragement, and enthusiasm for research, the completion of this project would not have been possible. I would also like to thank and acknowledge the members of my committee, Dr. Craig Bennell and Dr. Shelley Brown. Thank you for all of your guidance, support, and feedback on this project. I would also like to thank Dr. Diana Majury and Dr. Brian Cutler for taking time from their busy schedules to sit on my committee. A thank you is also necessary to June Callendar, as Departmental Advisor and Etelle Bourassa, as Graduate Studies Administer. You both have been vital in my journey as a PhD student and I could not have completed this without your help. I would also like to thank and acknowledge all of the members of the research team for the assistance they have provided over the past few years and towards the completion of this project. I thank you for taking time out of your busy schedules to assist with the many data collections all over the city. To the graduate student...

show abstract

The Influence of Perpetrator Exposure Time and Weapon Presence/Timing on Eyewitness Confidence and Accuracy

Cited by 20 publications

References 62 publications

“All I remember is the black eye”: A distinctive facial feature harms eyewitness identification

“All I remember is the black eye”: A distinctive facial feature harms eyewitness identification

The effect of viewing distance on empirical discriminability and the confidence–accuracy relationship for eyewitness identification

Identification Accuracy of Adolescent Eyewitnesses: The Role of Familiarity and Lineup Procedure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About