The Mystery Man Can Increase the Reliability of Eyewitness Identifications for Older Adult Witnesses

Havard, Catriona; Laybourn, Phyllis; Klecha, Barbara

doi:10.1007/s11896-016-9214-9

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the current study found that the wildcard lineup procedure was no more beneficial for older adults than the simultaneous lineup procedure. These results contradict the only other study to examine the wildcard lineup procedure with older adults (Havard et al, 2016). It should be noted, however, that the eyewitnesses in that study were presented with a video lineup.…”

Section: Identification Accuracycontrasting

confidence: 75%

“…When examining target-present lineups, no differences were found as a function of the lineup procedure; however, when examining target-absent lineups, older adults made significantly more correct rejections when presented with the wildcard lineup compared to the control lineup. There was no influence of the wildcard on the younger adults' identification accuracy in both target-present and target-absent lineups (Havard et al, 2016). The results of this study suggest that a salient rejection option (i.e.…”

Section: Lineup Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 47%

“…This study examines whether lineup procedures that help increase the rate of correct rejection for children, while maintaining the rate of correct identification, are also beneficial for older adults. To date, no published study has examined the utility of the elimination lineup with an older adult population, and only one study has examined the effects of presenting a wildcard lineup to older adults, finding the wildcard lineup to be superior to the simultaneous lineup (Havard et al, 2016). Erikson et al (2015) report that older adults are less likely to be accurate and less likely to be confident than younger adults; similarly, no confidence-accuracy relationship is typically found for older adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the wildcard; e.g. Havard et al, 2016;Pozzulo et al, 2015). Previous research has found that older adults produce less accurate person descriptors than younger adults (Aizpurura et al, 2009;Yarmey et al, 1994;Yarmey & Kent, 1980); therefore, it was predicted that younger adults would produce more accurate person descriptors compared to the older adults.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To the authors' knowledge, only one study has examined the efficacy of the wildcard lineup in older adults compared to younger adults. Havard, Laybourn, and Klecha (2016) examined whether the wildcard lineup is a viable option for older adults (60-to 84-yearolds) in comparison to younger adults (19-to 36-year-olds). Participants were shown a video of a theft and were then presented with a target-present or target-absent wildcard or control lineup one to two days later.…”

Section: Lineup Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparing Younger and Older Adult Eyewitnesses: Examining the Simultaneous, Elimination, and Wildcard Lineup Procedures

Pica

Pozzulo

2017

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Older adults (60-to 99-year-olds) and younger adults (18-to 49-year-olds) viewed a videotaped theft and were then asked to provide a description of the perpetrator. Following a brief delay, participants were presented with a simultaneous, elimination, or wildcard lineup procedure that was either target-present or target-absent. Overall, younger adult eyewitnesses were more likely to be correct in their identification decisions, reported more perpetrator descriptors, and had a higher proportion of accurate descriptors compared to older adults. Moreover, the simultaneous and elimination procedures were superior to the wildcard procedure in target-absent lineups. When presented with a target-present lineup, participants were more likely to be correct when presented with the simultaneous procedure compared to the elimination procedure. Neither of the identification procedures that have been shown to be beneficial with child eyewitnesses appear to have influenced the rate of correct identification or correct rejection for older adults as a separate age group.

show abstract

Section: Identification Accuracycontrasting

confidence: 75%

Section: Lineup Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 47%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Lineup Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing Younger and Older Adult Eyewitnesses: Examining the Simultaneous, Elimination, and Wildcard Lineup Procedures

Pica

Pozzulo

2017

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Eyewitness identification across the life span: A meta-analysis of age differences.

Fitzgerald¹,

Price²

2015

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lineup identifications are often a critical component of criminal investigations. Over the past 35 years, researchers have been conducting empirical studies to assess the impact of witness age on identification accuracy. A previous meta-analysis indicated that children are less likely than adults to correctly reject a lineup that does not contain the culprit, but children 5 years and older are as likely as adults to make a correct identification if the culprit is in the lineup (Pozzulo & Lindsay, 1998). We report an updated meta-analysis of age differences in eyewitness identification, summarizing data from 20,244 participants across 91 studies. Contrary to extant reviews, we adopt a life span approach and examine witnesses from early childhood to late adulthood. Children's increased tendency to erroneously select a culprit-absent lineup member was replicated. Children were also less likely than young adults to correctly identify the culprit. Group data from culprit-absent and culprit-present lineups were used to produce signal detection measures, which indicated young adults were better able than children to discriminate between guilty and innocent suspects. A strikingly similar pattern emerged for older adults, who had even stronger deficits in discriminability than children, relative to adults. Although identifications by young adults were the most reliable, identifications by all witnesses had probative value.

show abstract

A validation of the two-high threshold eyewitness identification model by reanalyzing published data

Menne

Winter

Bell

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two-high threshold (2-HT) eyewitness identification model serves as a new measurement tool to measure the latent cognitive processes underlying eyewitness identification performance. By simultaneously taking into account correct culprit identifications, false innocent-suspect identifications, false filler identifications in culprit-present and culprit-absent lineups as well as correct and false lineup rejections, the model capitalizes on the full range of data categories that are observed when measuring eyewitness identification performance. Thereby, the model is able to shed light on detection-based and non-detection-based processes underlying eyewitness identification performance. Specifically, the model incorporates parameters for the detection of culprit presence and absence, biased selection of the suspect and guessing-based selection among the lineup members. Here, we provide evidence of the validity of each of the four model parameters by applying the model to eight published data sets. The data sets come from studies with experimental manipulations that target one of the underlying processes specified by the model. Manipulations of encoding difficulty, lineup fairness and pre-lineup instructions were sensitively reflected in the parameters reflecting culprit-presence detection, biased selection and guessing-based selection, respectively. Manipulations designed to facilitate the rejection of culprit-absent lineups affected the parameter for culprit-absence detection. The reanalyses of published results thus suggest that the parameters sensitively reflect the manipulations of the processes they were designed to measure, providing support of the validity of the 2-HT eyewitness identification model.

show abstract

The Mystery Man Can Increase the Reliability of Eyewitness Identifications for Older Adult Witnesses

Cited by 4 publications

References 41 publications

Comparing Younger and Older Adult Eyewitnesses: Examining the Simultaneous, Elimination, and Wildcard Lineup Procedures

Comparing Younger and Older Adult Eyewitnesses: Examining the Simultaneous, Elimination, and Wildcard Lineup Procedures

Eyewitness identification across the life span: A meta-analysis of age differences.

A validation of the two-high threshold eyewitness identification model by reanalyzing published data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About