THE EFFECT OF THE INSTRUCTIONS ON FACE RECOGNITION: ACCURACY AND EYE MOVEMENTS

"The present experiment examines how instructions (absolute judgement vs. relative judgement) affect the performance in simultaneous lineups (present perpetrator and absent perpetrator). To find out whether the participants really followed the instructions, their eye movements were recorded when they faced the photo lineup. Sixty participants (44 women and 16 men) took part in the experiment. Overall, the results showed that participants with absolute judgement instructions made significantly less inter-photograph comparisons than those with relative judgement instructions. In the present perpetrator lineup, hit rate was lower for participants with absolute judgement instructions than with relative judgement instructions. In the absent perpetrator lineup, no differences were between both instruction conditions. Furthermore, as was expected, no relationship was found between “pre” and “post” confidence and accuracy in the lineups. Moreover, we examined participants’ metamemory evaluations about their examination pattern of the photographs in the lineup. Our results did not show high incongruity between the own participants’ judgment and their visual behavior."

Eyewitness Identification and Distinctive Features: When Similarity Matters

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.

Racial Bias Increases False Identification of Black Suspects in Simultaneous Lineups

People are better able to correctly identify the faces of individuals who belong to their own race. Research linking the cross-race effect in face recognition to racial attitudes has been limited to explicit measures and sequential presentation formats. Using a simultaneous lineup task, our results from two studies revealed a systematic relationship between explicit racial bias and increased false identification of Black faces. We observed inconsistent evidence to suggest that individual differences in implicit attitudes impact judgments of Black faces. Nevertheless, nonconscious activation of crime-related concepts prior to encoding facial targets impaired White perceivers’ accuracy for Black faces. Nonconscious priming of crime concepts did not affect White perceivers’ judgments of White faces. Thus, among Whites, racial bias, as a function of both individual differences and contextual cues, can increase the false identification of Black faces in simultaneous lineups. Theoretical and legal implications for face recognition and eyewitness memory are discussed.

Estimating the reliability of eyewitness identifications from police lineups

Laboratory-based mock crime studies have often been interpreted to mean that (i) eyewitness confidence in an identification made from a lineup is a weak indicator of accuracy and (ii) sequential lineups are diagnostically superior to traditional simultaneous lineups. Largely as a result, juries are increasingly encouraged to disregard eyewitness confidence, and up to 30% of law enforcement agencies in the United States have adopted the sequential procedure. We conducted a field study of actual eyewitnesses who were assigned to simultaneous or sequential photo lineups in the Houston Police Department over a 1-y period. Identifications were made using a three-point confidence scale, and a signal detection model was used to analyze and interpret the results. Our findings suggest that (i) confidence in an eyewitness identification from a fair lineup is a highly reliable indicator of accuracy and (ii) if there is any difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two lineup formats, it likely favors the simultaneous procedure.