Skip to content
Back to outputs

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation. / Rubinova, Eva; Fitzgerald, Ryan; Juncu, Stefana; Ribbers, Eva; Hope, Lorraine; Sauer, James.

In: Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Vol. 0, 0, 04.11.2020, p. 0.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Rubinova, E, Fitzgerald, R, Juncu, S, Ribbers, E, Hope, L & Sauer, J 2020, 'Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation', Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, vol. 0, 0, pp. 0. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

APA

Rubinova, E., Fitzgerald, R., Juncu, S., Ribbers, E., Hope, L., & Sauer, J. (2020). Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 0, 0. [0]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

Vancouver

Author

Rubinova, Eva ; Fitzgerald, Ryan ; Juncu, Stefana ; Ribbers, Eva ; Hope, Lorraine ; Sauer, James. / Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation. In: Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. 2020 ; Vol. 0. pp. 0.

Bibtex

@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 = "APC-PAID, 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",

}

RIS

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 - APC-PAID

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

VL - 0

SP - 0

JO - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

SN - 2211-3681

M1 - 0

ER -

ID: 22316976