Evaluating earwitness identification procedures: adapting pre-parade instructions and parade procedure

3Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Voice identification parades can be unreliable, as earwitness responses are error-prone. In this paper we tested performance across serial and sequential procedures, and varied pre-parade instructions, with the aim of reducing errors. The participants heard a target voice and later attempted to identify it from a parade. In Experiment 1 they were either warned that the target may or may not be present (standard warning) or encouraged to consider responding “not present” because of the associated risk of a wrongful conviction (strong warning). Strong warnings prompted a conservative criterion shift, with participants less likely to make a positive identification regardless of whether the target was present. In contrast to previous findings, we found no statistically reliable difference in accuracy between serial and sequential parades. Experiment 2 ruled out a potential confound in Experiment 1. Taken together, our results suggest that adapting pre-parade instructions provides a simple way of reducing the risk of false identifications.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Smith, H. M. J., Roeser, J., Pautz, N., Davis, J. P., Robson, J., Wright, D., … Stacey, P. C. (2023). Evaluating earwitness identification procedures: adapting pre-parade instructions and parade procedure. Memory, 31(1), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2129065

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free