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

Some groups of eyewitnesses, such as older adults and children, are less likely to correctly reject a target-absent (TA) line-up, as compared to younger adults. Previous research reports that using a silhouette in a video line-up called the ‘mystery man’ could increase correct rejections for TA lineups for child eyewitnesses, without reducing correct identifications for target-present (TP) line-ups (Havard and Memon in Appl Cogn Psychol 27:50–59, 2013). The current study, using older and younger adults, investigated whether using the mystery man would also increase the identification accuracy for older adults, without impairing younger adults’ identification accuracy. The results found that older adults in the ‘mystery man’ condition rejected TA line-ups significantly more often than those in the control condition (52 vs. 24 %), with no significant effect upon the TP line-ups. For the younger adults, the mystery man had no influence on identification responses for the TA or TP line-ups. Our findings suggest the mystery man technique may be beneficial for older adults, without detrimentally affecting the accuracy for younger adults, and thus could increase the reliability of eyewitness evidence, where video line-ups are employed.     

Blind lineup administration as a prophylactic against the postidentification feedback effect

Confidence and other testimony-relevant judgments may be distorted when witnesses are given confirming postidentification feedback, and double-blind procedures-wherein the lineup administrator does not know the identity of the suspect-are a commonly proposed, but untested, remedy for this effect. In the current study, mock witnesses viewed a staged crime video followed by a target-present or target-absent lineup where the administrator was or was not presumed to know the identity of the suspect. After making an identification decision, witnesses were or were not given realistic, but nonidentification-specific, feedback, and then confidence and other judgments were assessed. A significant interaction was found between blind condition and feedback such that feedback inflated confidence and other judgments in presumed nonblind conditions only; feedback had no effect on participants in presumed blind conditions. As predicted by the selective cue integration framework-a theoretical model suggested to explain the interaction between presumed blind administration and feedback-this interaction was significant only for inaccurate participants. These results suggest that blind administration may serve as a prophylactic against the negative effects of postidentification feedback. In addition, the effectiveness of our subtle feedback in influencing judgments suggests that lineup administrators should take care not to provide any feedback to eyewitnesses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Lineup Identification by Children: Effects of Clothing Bias

This study examined effects of clothing cues on children's identification accuracy from lineups. Four- to 14-year-olds (n = 228) saw 12 video clips of individuals, each wearing a distinctly colored shirt. After watching each clip children were presented with a target-present or target-absent photo lineup. Three clothing conditions were included. In 2 conditions all lineup members wore the same colored shirt; in the third, biased condition, the shirt color of only one individual matched that seen in the preceding clip (the target in target-present trials and the replacement in target-absent trials). Correct identifications of the target in target-present trials were most frequent in the biased condition, whereas in target-absent trials the biased condition led to more false identifications of the target replacement. Older children were more accurate than younger children, both in choosing the target from target-present lineups and rejecting target-absent lineups. These findings suggest that a simple clothing cue such as shirt color can have a significant impact on children's lineup identification accuracy.     

A Problem with Double-Blind Photospread Procedures: Photospread Administrators Use One Eyewitness's Confidence to Influence the Identification of Another Eyewitness

In Experiment 1, photospread administrators (PAs, N = 50) showed a target-absent photospread to a confederate eyewitness (CW), who was randomly assigned to identify one photo with either high or low confidence. PAs subsequently administered the same target-absent photospread to participant eyewitnesses (PWs, N = 50), all of whom had viewed a live staged crime 1 week earlier. CWs were rated by the PAs as significantly more confident in the high-confidence condition versus low-confidence condition. More importantly, the confidence of the CW affected the identification decision of the PW. In the low-confidence condition, the photo identified by the CW was identified by the PW significantly more than the other photos; there was no significant difference in photo choice in the high-confidence condition. In spite of the obvious influence exerted in the low-confidence condition, observers were not able to detect bias in the photospread procedures. A second experiment was conducted to test a post-hoc explanation for the results of Experiment 1: PAs exerted influence in the low-confidence condition because they perceived the task as more difficult for the eyewitness than in the high-confidence condition. Independent observers (N = 84) rated the difficulty of the confederate's task as higher in the low-confidence condition compared with the high-confidence condition, suggesting that expectations of task difficulty might be driving the effect observed in Experiment 1. Results support recommendations for double-blind photospreads and emphasize that the same investigator should not administer photo lineups to multiple eyewitnesses in an investigation.     

Simultaneous,Sequential, Elimination,and Wildcard: A Comparison of Lineup Procedures

This study compared four lineup procedures: the simultaneous, sequential, elimination, and wildcard. Two hundred and sixty-nine university students (M = 20.17 years) watched a mock, videotaped crime. Then, following a brief delay, they viewed a 6-person target-present or -absent lineup using one of the four lineup procedures. For target-present lineups, correct identification rates for the four lineup procedures were comparable. In contrast, for target-absent lineups, the correct rejection rate was higher using the elimination lineup procedure compared to the wildcard and simultaneous lineup procedures. Remaining comparisons between lineup procedures found no significant differences. Also diagnosticity ratios were similar across the four procedures.     

A Preidentification Questioning Effect: Serendipitously Increasing Correct Rejections

A study designed to test the effects of delay between crime and lineup on identification accuracy produced an unusually high rate of correct rejection from target-absent, simultaneous lineups (J. E. Dysart, 1999). Examining the procedures indicated that one question included in a preidentification questionnaire differed from those used previously. The question asked witnesses if they believed they would be able to correctly reject a target-absent lineup. An experiment (N = 138) was conducted to explore the impact of preidentification questions, including this new question, on witness accuracy. Results revealed that asking witnesses these questions, prior to viewing the lineup, significantly increased correct rejections of target-absent simultaneous lineups.     

Own-age bias in video lineups: a comparison between children and adults

Abstract

The present study investigated whether child (six–eight years of age) and adult witnesses (18–29 years of age) would exhibit an own-age bias when trying to identify targets from video lineups. One hundred and eighty-six participants viewed two filmed events that were identical, except one starred a child target and one a young adult. After a delay of two–three days each witness saw a lineup for the child and adult target. Children exhibited an own-age bias and were better at correctly identifying the own-age target from a target-present (TP) lineup and made more correct rejections for the own-age target-absent (TA) lineup. Adults however, showed a reversed own-age bias for the TP lineups as they made more correct identifications for the child target, but exhibited no bias for the TA lineups. The results suggest that differences in identification accuracy may be due to whether witness age and suspect age overlap.     

Identification Accuracy of Children versus Adults: A Meta-Analysis

Identification accuracy of children and adults was examined in a meta-analysis. Preschoolers (M = 4 years) were less likely than adults to make correct identifications. Children over the age of 5 did not differ significantly from adults with regard to correct identification rate. Children of all ages examined were less likely than adults to correctly reject a target-absent lineup. Even adolescents (M = 12–13 years) did not reach an adult rate of correct rejection. Compared to simultaneous lineup presentation, sequential lineups increased the child–adult gap for correct rejections. Providing child witnesses with identification practice or training did not increase their correct rejection rates. Suggestions for children's inability to correctly reject target-absent lineups are discussed. Future directions for identification research are presented.     

Police Witness Identification Images: A Geometric Morphometric Analysis*

Abstract: Research into witness identification images typically occurs within the laboratory and involves subjective likeness and recognizability judgments. This study analyzed whether actual witness identification images systematically alter the facial shapes of the suspects described. The shape analysis tool, geometric morphometrics, was applied to 46 homologous facial landmarks displayed on 50 witness identification images and their corresponding arrest photographs, using principal component analysis and multivariate regressions. The results indicate that compared with arrest photographs, witness identification images systematically depict suspects with lowered and medially located eyebrows (p = <0.000001). This was found to occur independently of the Police Artist, and did not occur with composites produced under laboratory conditions. There are several possible explanations for this finding, including any, or all, of the following: The suspect was frowning at the time of the incident, the witness had negative feelings toward the suspect, this is an effect of unfamiliar face processing, the suspect displayed fear at the time of their arrest photograph.     

Video superimposition at the C.A. Pound Laboratory 1987 to 1992.

William R. Maples practiced many aspects of human identification using simple and relatively inexpensive video superimposition equipment. Identification of skulls by comparison to known photographs was a primary concern. Clear, smiling photographs revealing the spatial relationships of the teeth to one another led to uncomplicated positive identifications. However, without benefit of dentition, how accurate was an identification based on the alignment of soft tissues with the underlying skull? Most importantly, how often would a false positive result when anterior dentition were not available? A study conducted by this author and Dr. Maples used three human heads and 98 profile and full-face photographs. A 0.6% incidence of false match resulted when both views of the face were used. Lateral view and frontal view superimpositions were identified incorrectly in 9.6% and 8.5% of the sample respectively. As a result, multiple photographs from varying angles were requested for superimposition identity cases. Additional applications in laboratory case work were developed for the equipment. Light boxes under the television cameras allowed radiographic comparisons. Video taped comparisons of antemortem and postmortem radiographs were shown to medical examiners and families as proof of identification. Dr. Maples and this author were also involved in several cases in which photographs taken by a surveillance or ATM camera were compared to court ordered photographs of an alleged perpetrator. One case, which went to trial, led to the conviction of a habitual criminal under Florida statute. This individual had a condition known as Stahl's ear, a deformation of the cartilaginous structure. The ear was seen clearly in many of the ATM camera photographs and was aligned easily with the known photographic sample.     

The Mitigating Effects of Suspicion on Post-Identification Feedback and on Retrospective Eyewitness Memory

Three studies examined procedures for reducing the post-identification feedback effect. After viewing a video event, participants were then asked to identify a suspect from a target-absent photo lineup. After making their identification, some participants were given information suggesting that their identification was correct, while others were given no information about the accuracy of their identification. Some participants who received confirming feedback were also given reasons to entertain suspicion regarding the motives of the lineup administrator, either immediately (Experiment 1) or after a one-week retention interval (Experiment 2). Suspicious perceivers failed to demonstrate the confidence inflation effects typically associated with confirming post-identification feedback. In Experiment 3, the confidence prophylactic effect was tested both immediately and after a one-week retention interval. The effect of confidence prophylactic varied with retention interval such that it eliminated the effects of post-identification feedback immediately but not after a retention interval. However, the suspicion manipulation eliminated the post-identification feedback effects at both time intervals. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

The Effect of Post-ID Feedback on Retrospective Self-Reports in Showups

This study examined the effects of post-identification feedback on witness retrospective self-reports in showups and lineups, and importantly, focused on guilty and innocent suspect identifications. After viewing a mock crime video, participants were asked to identify the suspect from either a target-present or target-absent photo lineup or showup. Participants were randomly assigned to receive confirming feedback (“Great job, you made the correct decision”) or no feedback about their identification, before self-reporting confidence, view, attention, willingness to testify, and trust of a witness with a similar view. We replicated the typical finding that confirming feedback inflated witness self-reports and resulted in a larger proportion of witnesses meeting the credibility threshold necessary to testify. Importantly, we also found that showups had significantly higher self-reports than lineups, despite the equal discriminability achieved in this study between these two procedures. These data provide yet another reason for the police to restrict use of showups.     

Source Camera Identification for Heavily JPEG Compressed Low Resolution Still Images*

Abstract: In this research, we examined whether fixed pattern noise or more specifically Photo Response Non‐Uniformity (PRNU) can be used to identify the source camera of heavily JPEG compressed digital photographs of resolution 640 × 480 pixels. We extracted PRNU patterns from both reference and questioned images using a two‐dimensional Gaussian filter and compared these patterns by calculating the correlation coefficient between them. Both the closed and open‐set problems were addressed, leading the problems in the closed set to high accuracies for 83% for single images and 100% for around 20 simultaneously identified questioned images. The correct source camera was chosen from a set of 38 cameras of four different types. For the open‐set problem, decision levels were obtained for several numbers of simultaneously identified questioned images. The corresponding false rejection rates were unsatisfactory for single images but improved for simultaneous identification of multiple images.     

The Culprit in Target-Absent Lineups: Understanding Young Children’s False Positive Responding

Young children (4- to 7-years old; N = 59) and adults (N = 53) were shown a series of targets that were either familiar (i.e., popular cartoon characters) or unfamiliar (unknown human faces) to assess whether children’s false positive responding with target-absent lineups is driven by social factors to a greater degree than cognitive factors. Although children were able to produce correct identification rates with virtually 100% accuracy for the cartoon characters, they produced a significantly lower correct rejection rate compared to adults. Children also produced a significantly lower correct rejection rate for the human faces compared to adults. These data are discussed for understanding children’s identification evidence.     

Knowing when the camera lies: Judicial instructions mitigate the camera perspective bias

Purpose. Videotaped confession evidence elicits harsher evaluations against a defendant if initially recorded with the camera focused primarily on the suspect, compared with other presentation formats. Unfortunately, most videotaped confession evidence employs this biasing suspect‐focus camera perspective format, leaving defendants with no recourse. The present study examined the utility of judicial instructions in mitigating the effects of the camera perspective bias on individual juror verdicts. Methods. Through random assignment, 156 mock jurors did or did not receive explicit instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias prior to viewing a video recording of an authentic true or false confession. Results. As expected, mock jurors who received instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias reported more lenient judgments of confessor guilt after viewing a suspect‐focus confession recording compared to those who did not receive such instructions. However, this relative leniency emerged only in response to false, and not true, confessions. Conclusions. Results demonstrated that judicial instructions used in the present research mitigated the effect of camera perspective on mock‐juror judgments of suspect guilt.     

Does methodology matter in eyewitness identification research? The effect of live versus video exposure on eyewitness identification accuracy

The present study examined the effect of mode of target exposure (live versus video) on eyewitness identification accuracy. Adult participants (N=104) were exposed to a staged crime that they witnessed either live or on videotape. Participants were then asked to rate their stress and arousal levels prior to being presented with either a target-present or -absent simultaneous lineup. Across target-present and -absent lineups, mode of target exposure did not have a significant effect on identification accuracy. However, mode of target exposure was found to have a significant effect on stress and arousal levels. Participants who witnessed the crime live had higher levels of stress and arousal than those who were exposed to the videotaped crime. A higher level of arousal was significantly related to poorer identification accuracy for those in the video condition. For participants in the live condition however, stress and arousal had no effect on eyewitness identification accuracy. Implications of these findings in regards to the generalizability of laboratory-based research on eyewitness testimony to real-life crime are discussed.