Investigating the Accuracy of Eyewitness Identification

1. Investigating the Accuracy of Eyewitness Identification Presentation By Shelley West & Kamia Creelman

2. Literature Review Research Importance • avoid wrongful convictions Previous Research Investigated Identifications From Lineups • mode of presentation • false identifications • correct identifications • correct rejections • confidence level

3. Literature Review (cont’d) Background Information • Fallibility of eyewitness identification- 1970s • Substantial research conducted in last 20 yrs in order to establish more accurate identifications Main Focus of Research Modes of Presentation - simultaneous (all at once) - sequential (one at a time)

4. Literature Findings Sequential > Simultaneous Sequential Mode of Presenting Lineups produced more accurate results concerning: • false identifications • correct identifications • correct rejections • confidence levels

5. Overview of Present Study • Pilot Study • 48 participants, gender equal groups • Surveillance video of a man stealing a purse • questionnaire used as a distraction and to obtain demographic info • presented mug shots either simultaneously or sequentially • asked participants to rate their certainty level regarding I.D.s

7. Hypotheses • Sequential mode of presentation would produce fewer false I.D.s, more correct rejections, & lower certainty level than simultaneous mode of presentation • There would be no difference between the # of false I.D.s, correct rejections, & level of certainty for males & females

8. Experimental Design • 2X2 between-subjects factorial design • IV#1: (true) mode of presentation - simultaneous (all at once) - sequential (one at a time) • IV#2: (quasi) gender - male - female • 3 DVs - # false I.D.s - # correct rejections - level of certainty

9. Variables Measured (How and What) • coding sheets - # false I.D.s - # correct rejections - level of certainty - # correct I.D.s questionnaires - distraction - record gender and age

10. Results and Stats 1. Chi-Square Goodness of Fit Test • tested for order effects • 2 • X (6, N=48) = 4.500, p>.05) • no order effects found 2. Chi-Square Test for Independence • test effects of mode on false I.D.s, correct I.D.s, and no I.D.s • 2 • 2 • X (1, N = 48) = .000, p>.05) • no significance found

11. Results and Stats (cont’d) 3. Chi-Square Test for Independence • tested for correct rejections • 2 • X (1, N = 48) = .000, p>.05) • no significance found 4. 2x2 between-subjects ANOVA on certainty level • no main effect for gender (F (1, 44) = 2.81, p = .101) • no main effect for mode (F (1, 44) = .000, p > .05) • no interaction between gender and mode (F (1, 44) = .005, p>,05)

12. Frequency Bar Graph Legend 00 = no I.D. 01 = correct I.D. 03 = most frequent false I.D. 02,04,05,06 = other false I.D.s.

13. Identification Frequencies

14. Interpretation of Results No support for Hexp. #1: • Sequential mode of presentation would produce fewer false I.D.s, more correct rejections and lower certainty level than simultaneous mode of presentation. No support for Hexp. #2: • There would be no difference between the # of false I.D.s, correct rejections, and levels of certainty for males and females.

15. Certainty Differences Between Gender

16. Gender Differences For Correct Rejections

17. Gender Differences for Identifications

18. Discussion No support for Hypotheses Does not support Literature Review Floor Effects • small sample size • too few subjects per cell • small numbers Gender Relationship • unexpected • not addressed in literature review • p = .101

19. Discussion Cont’d Possible factors contributing to non-signif results • surveillance video (ecological validity) • overcompensation for ceiling effects • striped shirt, ball caps Future Research • larger sample • correct rejections (suspect not in the lineup half of the time) • whether they knew # of photos they’d see • tighter control over extraneous variables • GENDER