Eyewitness testimonies provide crucial evidence in pinpointing the identity of the perpetrator in order to solve a crime, thus the criminal justice system depends upon the accuracy of eyewitness identification to investigate and prosecute criminals. However, eyewitness identification is imperfect and the leading cause of wrongful convictions (Huff, Rattner, & Sagarin, 1996; Scheck, Neufeld, & Dwyer, 2000). One prominent method of eyewitness identification is a line-up procedure during which “A line-up is a procedure in which a criminal suspect (or a picture of the suspect) is placed among other people (or pictures of other people) and shown to an eyewitness to see if the witness will identify the suspect as the culprit in question” (Wells &
…show more content…
In this condition, the eyewitness will tend to compare line-ups members in order determine which one most closely resembles the criterion for their memory of the perpetrator, a process termed relative judgment (Wells, 1984). Green and Swets’s (1966) signal detection theory (SDT) examines these variations in selection based upon memory criterion, delineating the ability to correctly recognize an old experience (a hit response), and to falsely recognize a new experience as old (a false alarm response). The SIM strategy has been criticized for increasing false positive selections because of a familiarity bias that induces the selection of an innocent suspect who resembles the perpetrator more than any other line-up member based upon relative judgement rather than a judgement of certainty (Dysart & Lindsay, 2001; Kneller, Memon, & Stevenage, 2001; Lindsay & Bellinger, 1999; Lindsay, Lea, Nosworthy, et al., 1991). Moreover, in a recent survey of 64 eyewitness experts, Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, and Memon (2001) found that 81% agreed with the general proposition that witnesses are more likely to misidentify someone by making a relative judgment when presented with a SIM line-up because it leads some witnesses who have a weak memory trace to choose …show more content…
The proposed Sequential Presentation only line-up (SPO) presents suspect one at a time and the eyewitness responds only after seeing all of them. By presenting one at a time as in the SIM condition it would be expected that a SPO would not induce a criterion shift, and by only requiring a response after all suspects had been presented it might be expected in induce an absolute judgement as seen in the SEQ line-up (Gronlund, 2004). However, this method is as of yet untested, despite the potential it offers to resolving the lack of nexus between current techniques.
Therefore, this study aims to determine if there is a presentation method that facilitates benefits of absolute judgement without evoking the drawbacks of inducing a criterion shift. The following were hypothesised: (i) The sequential line-up would result in fewer false alarms than the simultaneous line-up and fewer hits than the simultaneous line-up and (ii) The SPO line-up should result in fewer false alarms than the simultaneous line-up but no reduction in hit rate, which should be larger than the sequential
In this condition, the eyewitness will tend to compare line-ups members in order determine which one most closely resembles the criterion for their memory of the perpetrator, a process termed relative judgment (Wells, 1984). Green and Swets’s (1966) signal detection theory (SDT) examines these variations in selection based upon memory criterion, delineating the ability to correctly recognize an old experience (a hit response), and to falsely recognize a new experience as old (a false alarm response). The SIM strategy has been criticized for increasing false positive selections because of a familiarity bias that induces the selection of an innocent suspect who resembles the perpetrator more than any other line-up member based upon relative judgement rather than a judgement of certainty (Dysart & Lindsay, 2001; Kneller, Memon, & Stevenage, 2001; Lindsay & Bellinger, 1999; Lindsay, Lea, Nosworthy, et al., 1991). Moreover, in a recent survey of 64 eyewitness experts, Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, and Memon (2001) found that 81% agreed with the general proposition that witnesses are more likely to misidentify someone by making a relative judgment when presented with a SIM line-up because it leads some witnesses who have a weak memory trace to choose …show more content…
The proposed Sequential Presentation only line-up (SPO) presents suspect one at a time and the eyewitness responds only after seeing all of them. By presenting one at a time as in the SIM condition it would be expected that a SPO would not induce a criterion shift, and by only requiring a response after all suspects had been presented it might be expected in induce an absolute judgement as seen in the SEQ line-up (Gronlund, 2004). However, this method is as of yet untested, despite the potential it offers to resolving the lack of nexus between current techniques.
Therefore, this study aims to determine if there is a presentation method that facilitates benefits of absolute judgement without evoking the drawbacks of inducing a criterion shift. The following were hypothesised: (i) The sequential line-up would result in fewer false alarms than the simultaneous line-up and fewer hits than the simultaneous line-up and (ii) The SPO line-up should result in fewer false alarms than the simultaneous line-up but no reduction in hit rate, which should be larger than the sequential