In four experiments, we investigated theoretical and practical issues around eyewitness identification accuracy and confidence for tattooed suspects. We varied how tattoos were treated in lineups (Experiments 1 and 2) and the match between the suspect’s tattoo the perpetrator’s tattoo (Experiments 3 and 4). We replicated the finding that modifying lineup photographs to prevent a tattooed suspect from standing out mitigates the risk of innocent suspect identifications. We also demonstrated that sequential lineups (cf. simultaneous) do not mitigate the risk of biased lineups when the suspect stands out because of a tattoo. Contrary to previous research in which biased lineups did not impact correct identification rates differentially by lineup type, we found that biased lineups decreased correct identifications in sequential, but not simultaneous, lineups. Additionally, we found that the tattoo worn by an innocent suspect need not be identical to that of the perpetrator—similar placement and designs also inflate innocent suspect identifications, although a tattoo in a different location with a different design protected innocent suspects. Finally, our data indicate that when researching distinctive marks in lineups, researchers should request descriptions from the eyewitness-participants following the mock crime in order to determine whether the witness noticed the distinctive mark.
Eyewitness Identification and Distinctive Features: When Similarity Matters
