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.
CITATION STYLE
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
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.