TY - JOUR
T1 - Is there a magical time boundary for diagnosing eyewitness identification accuracy in sequential line-ups?
AU - Sauer, James
AU - Brewer, N.
AU - Wells, G.
PY - 2008/2
Y1 - 2008/2
N2 - We examined whether eyewitness identification latencies for sequential line-up
decisions indicate an optimum time boundary that reliably discriminates accurate from
inaccurate decisions. Participants ðN ¼ 381Þ observed a crime simulation and
attempted two separate identifications from target-present or target-absent sequential
line-ups. As has previously been found with simultaneous line-ups, the optimum time
boundary identified did not reliably discriminate accurate from inaccurate
identifications for both line-up targets. Diagnosticity for choosers was, however,
much higher at very high confidence levels than at lower levels. Possible reasons for why
one index of signal strength (confidence), but not another (latency), might postdict
accuracy within the sequential framework were presented.
AB - We examined whether eyewitness identification latencies for sequential line-up
decisions indicate an optimum time boundary that reliably discriminates accurate from
inaccurate decisions. Participants ðN ¼ 381Þ observed a crime simulation and
attempted two separate identifications from target-present or target-absent sequential
line-ups. As has previously been found with simultaneous line-ups, the optimum time
boundary identified did not reliably discriminate accurate from inaccurate
identifications for both line-up targets. Diagnosticity for choosers was, however,
much higher at very high confidence levels than at lower levels. Possible reasons for why
one index of signal strength (confidence), but not another (latency), might postdict
accuracy within the sequential framework were presented.
U2 - 10.1348/135532506X159203
DO - 10.1348/135532506X159203
M3 - Article
SN - 1355-3259
VL - 13
SP - 123
EP - 135
JO - Legal and Criminological Psychology
JF - Legal and Criminological Psychology
IS - 1
ER -