Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation

Eva Rubinova; Ryan Fitzgerald; Stefana Juncu; Eva Ribbers; Lorraine Hope; James Sauer

doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation

Eva Rubinova, Ryan Fitzgerald, Stefana Juncu, Eva Ribbers, Lorraine Hope, James Sauer

University of Tasmania

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

264 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

Original language	English
Article number	0
Pages (from-to)	0
Journal	Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Volume	0
Early online date	4 Nov 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009
Publication status	Early online - 4 Nov 2020

Keywords

RCUK
ESRC
ES/N016602/1
eyewitness identification accuracy
face
body
lineup
showup

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

Live Presentation for Eyewitness IdentificationProof, 833 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{7662f5a094cc4e4ab8ea755e179579a0,

title = "Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation",

abstract = "Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.",

keywords = "RCUK, ESRC, ES/N016602/1, eyewitness identification accuracy, face, body, lineup, showup",

author = "Eva Rubinova and Ryan Fitzgerald and Stefana Juncu and Eva Ribbers and Lorraine Hope and James Sauer",

year = "2020",

month = nov,

day = "4",

doi = "10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009",

language = "English",

volume = "0",

pages = "0",

journal = "Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition",

issn = "2211-3681",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation

AU - Rubinova, Eva

AU - Fitzgerald, Ryan

AU - Juncu, Stefana

AU - Ribbers, Eva

AU - Hope, Lorraine

AU - Sauer, James

PY - 2020/11/4

Y1 - 2020/11/4

N2 - Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

AB - Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

KW - RCUK

KW - ESRC

KW - ES/N016602/1

KW - eyewitness identification accuracy

KW - face

KW - body

KW - lineup

KW - showup

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221136812030070X

U2 - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

DO - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

M3 - Article

SN - 2211-3681

VL - 0

SP - 0

JO - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

M1 - 0

ER -

Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this