Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T17:31:21.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Police Decisions Involved in Collecting Eyewitness Identification Evidence

from Part II - Pretrial Phase Decision-Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2024

By
Jacqueline A. Katzman  and
Margaret Bull Kovera
Edited by
Monica K. Miller ,
Logan A. Yelderman ,
Matthew T. Huss  and
Jason A. Cantone
Monica K. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Reno
Logan A. Yelderman
Affiliation:
Prairie View A & M University, Texas
Matthew T. Huss
Affiliation:
Creighton University, Omaha
Jason A. Cantone
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Get access

Summary

This chapter discusses decisions that police should make about how to collect eyewitness identification evidence to ensure that they elicit the most accurate identification decisions from eyewitnesses. Eyewitness decisions include whether to select someone out of a lineup and whom to pick, as well as confidence in the accuracy of that choice. Although witnessing conditions – including (among others) whether the perpetrator and witnesses belong to the same racial/ethnic groups, weapon presence, and poor viewing conditions – can influence the accuracy of identification decisions, the chapter will focus primarily on how decisions made by the police about which identification procedures to use affect the accuracy of identification decisions. The chapter discusses many of these decisions in the context of the best practices that are recommended based on the available literature. Of special interest is when there is an interaction between the witness conditioning the decisions made by law enforcement. The chapter concludes with recommendations for future research on these topics.

Keywords

best practicesconfidenceeyewitnessidentification accuracylineupspolicing
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making , pp. 117 - 128
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

APA brief for Commonwealth v. Walker (2014). www.apa.org/about/offices/ogc/amicus/walker.aspx.Google Scholar
Bornstein, B. H., Deffenbacher, K. A., Penrod, S. D., & McGorty, E. K. (2012). Effects of exposure time and cognitive operations on facial identification accuracy: A meta-analysis of two variables associated with initial memory strength. Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(5), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2010.508458.Google Scholar
Clark, S. E. (2005). A re-examination of the effects of biased lineup instructions in eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 29(4), 395–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-5690-7.Google Scholar
Commonwealth v. Walker, 92 A.3d 766 (2014).Google Scholar
Costanzo, M. & Levett, L. M. (2020). The American Psychology-Law Society scientific review paper on the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 44(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000362.Google Scholar
Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., McGorty, E. K., & Penrod, S. D. (2008). Forgetting the once-seen face: Estimating the strength of an eyewitness’s memory representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14,139–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898x.14.2.139.Google Scholar
Deffenbacher, K. A., Bornstein, B. H., & Penrod, S. D. (2004). A meta-analytic review of the effects of high stress on eyewitness memory. Law and Human Behavior, 28(6), 687–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-004-0565-x.Google Scholar
Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. Dover Publications. https://doi.org/10.5214%2Fans.0972.7531.200408.Google Scholar
Fawcett, J. M., Russell, E. J., Peace, K. A., & Christie, J. (2013). Of guns and geese: A meta-analytic review of the “weapon focus” literature. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19, 35–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2011.599325.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, R. J., & Price, H. L. (2015). Eyewitness identification across the life span: A meta-analysis of age differences. Psychological Bulletin, 141(6), 1228−1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000013.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, R. J., Price, H. L., Oriet, C., & Charman, S. D. (2013). The effect of suspect-filler similarity on eyewitness identification decisions: A meta-analysis. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19, 151–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030618.Google Scholar
Garrett, B. (2012). Convicting the innocent: Where criminal prosecutions go wrong. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Grabman, J. H., & Dodson, C. S. (2020). Stark individual differences: Face recognition ability influences the relationship between confidence and accuracy in a recognition test of Game of Thrones actors. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(2), 254–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.02.007.Google Scholar
Greathouse, S. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2009). Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9136-x.Google Scholar
Innocence Project. (n.d.). DNA Exonerations in the United States. www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/.Google Scholar
Katzman, J. & Kovera, M. B. (2022). Evidence strength (insufficiently) affects police officers’ decisions to place a suspect in a lineup. Law and Human Behavior, 46(1), 30−44. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000476.Google Scholar
Kovera, M. B., & Evelo, A. J. (2017). The case for double-blind lineup administration. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(4), 421−437. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000139.Google Scholar
Kovera, M. B., & Evelo, A. J. (2020). Improving eyewitness identification evidence through double-blind administration. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(6), 563−568. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420969366.Google Scholar
Lampinen, J. M., Erickson, W. B., Moore, K. N., & Hittson, A. (2014). Effects of distance on face recognition: Implications for eyewitness identification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1489−1494. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0641-2.Google Scholar
Leippe, M. R., Wells, G. L., & Ostrom, T. M. (1978). Crime seriousness as a determinant of accuracy in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.63.3.345.Google Scholar
Lindsay, R. C. L., Semmler, C., Weber, N., Brewer, N., & Lindsay, M. R. (2008). How variations in distance affect eyewitness reports and identification accuracy. Law and Human Behavior, 32(6), 526–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9128-x.Google Scholar
Loftus, G. R., & Harley, E. M. (2005). Why is it easier to identify someone close than far away? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1),43–65. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196348.Google Scholar
Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.3.Google Scholar
Memon, A., Gabbert, F., & Hope, L. (2004). The ageing eyewitness. In Adler, J. R. (Ed.), Forensic psychology: Concepts, debates and practice (pp. 96–112). Willan Publishing.Google Scholar
Modjadidi, K., & Kovera, M. B. (2018). Viewing videotaped identification procedure increases jurors’ sensitivity to single-blind lineup administration. Law and Human Behavior, 42(3), 244–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000288.Google Scholar
Molinaro, P. F., Charman, S. D., & Wylie, K. (2021). Pre-identification confidence is related to eyewitness lineup identification accuracy across heterogeneous encoding conditions. Law and Human Behavior, 45(6), 524–541. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000452.Google Scholar
Neuschatz, J. S., Wetmore, S. A., Key, K. N., et al. (2016). A comprehensive evaluation of showups. In Bornstein, B. & Miller, M. K. (Eds.), Advances in psychology and law (pp. 43–69). Springer International Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29406-3_2.Google Scholar
Orfield, M. W., Jr. (1987). The exclusionary rule and deterrence: An empirical study of Chicago narcotics officers. Chicano Law Review, 54, 1016–1069. http://doi.org/10.2307/1599834.Google Scholar
Papailiou, A. P., Yokum, D. V. & Robertson, C. T. (2015). The novel New Jersey eyewitness instruction induces skepticism but not sensitivity. PLoS ONE, 10(12), e0142695. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142695.Google Scholar
Semmler, C., Dunn, J., Mickes, L., & Wixted, J. T. (2018). The role of estimator variables in eyewitness identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(3), 400–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000157.Google Scholar
Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.100.2.139.Google Scholar
Slobogin, C. (1996). Testifying: Police perjury and what to do about it. University of Colorado Law Review, 67, 1037–1060.Google Scholar
Smalarz, L. (2021). Suspect bias: A neglected threat to the reliability of eyewitness identification evidence. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 10(3), 356–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2021.06.005.Google Scholar
Smith, A. M., Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Penrod, S. D. (2017). Fair lineups are better than biased lineups and showups, but not because they increase underlying discriminability. Law and Human Behavior, 41(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000219.Google Scholar
Sporer, S. L. (1992). Post-dicting eyewitness accuracy: Confidence, decision-times and person descriptions of choosers and non-choosers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 157–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420220205.Google Scholar
Steblay, N. M. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 413–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02352267.Google Scholar
Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024890732059.Google Scholar
Steblay, N. K. (2013). Lineup instructions. In Cutler, B. L. (Ed.), Reform of eyewitness identification procedures (pp. 65–86). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14094-004.Google Scholar
Steblay, N. K., Wells, G. L., & Douglass, A. B. (2014). The eyewitness post identification feedback effect 15 years later: Theoretical and policy implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000001.Google Scholar
Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21(3), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024890732059.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, W. A., & van der Schrier, J. H. (1996). Face recognition as a function of distance and illumination: A practical tool for use in the courtroom. Psychology, Crime & Law, 2, 321−332. http://doi.org/10.1080/10683160410001715123.Google Scholar
Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness-testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(12), 1546–1557. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.12.1546.Google Scholar
Wells, G. L., Kovera, M. B., Douglass, A. B., et al. (2020). Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 44(1), 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000359.Google Scholar
Wells, G. L., Small, M., Penrod, S., et al. (1998). Eyewitness identification procedures: Recommendations for lineups and photospreads. Law and Human Behavior, 22(6), 603–647. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025750605807.Google Scholar
Wells, G. L., Yang, Y., & Smalarz, L. (2015). Eyewitness identification: Bayesian information gain, base-rate effect equivalency curves, and reasonable suspicion. Law and Human Behavior, 39(2), 99–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000125.Google Scholar
Wixted, J. T., & Wells, G. L. (2017). The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: A new synthesis. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18(1), 10–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616686966.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. M., Chorn, J. A., Rhead, , et al. (2017). Memory strength and lineup presentation moderate effects of administrator influence on mistaken identifications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23(4), 460–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000147.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×