Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Nathan Weber, N. Brewer, G. Wells, C. Semmler, Amber Keast (2004)
Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency: the unruly 10-12-second rule.Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 10 3
S. Sporer (1994)
Decision times and eyewitness identification accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups
D. Krantz (1974)
Learning, memory, and thinking
B. Murdock, P. Dufty (1972)
Strength theory and recognition memoryJournal of Experimental Psychology, 94
G. Wells, Michael Leippe, T. Ostrom (1979)
Guidelines for empirically assessing the fairness of a lineupLaw and Human Behavior, 3
S. Sporer (1993)
Eyewitness identification accuracy, confidence, and decision times in simultaneous and sequential lineupsJournal of Applied Psychology, 78
R. Lindsay, G. Wells (1985)
Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70
R. Lindsay, G. Wells (1980)
What price justice?Law and Human Behavior, 4
E. Bjork, R. Bjork (1996)
Memory: Handbook of Perception and Cognition
T. Zandt (2000)
ROC curves and confidence judgments in recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26
A. Treisman, Stephen Gormican (1988)
Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries.Psychological review, 95 1
G. Gillund, R. Shiffrin (1984)
A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.Psychological review, 91 1
R. C. Atkinson, J. F. Juola (1974)
Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology: Vol. 1. Learning, memory and thinking
T. Moore (2006)
Review of Psychology and Law: An Empirical Perspective.Canadian Psychology, 47
D. Dunning, L. Stern (1994)
Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate eyewitness identifications via inquiries about decision processesJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67
John Sutton, Celia Harris, A. Barnier (1977)
Memory and Cognition
B. Murdock (1985)
An analysis of the strength-latency relationshipMemory & Cognition, 13
N. Brewer, N. Weber, C. Semmler (2005)
Psychology and law: An empirical perspective
N. Weber, N. Brewer, G. L. Wells, C. Semmler, A. Keast (2004)
Eyewitness identification and response latency: The unruly 10–12 second ruleJournal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10
S. Sporer (1992)
Post-dicting eyewitness accuracy: Confidence, decision-times and person descriptions of choosers and non-choosersEuropean Journal of Social Psychology, 22
Steven Smith, R. Lindsay, Sean Pryke (2000)
Postdictors of eyewitness errors: can false identifications be diagnosed?The Journal of applied psychology, 85 4
N. Brewer, Michael Gordon, N. Bond (2000)
Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategyPsychology, Crime & Law, 6
N. Brewer, N. Weber, C. Semmler (in press)
Handbook of eyewitness psychology: Volume 2: Memory for people
R. Atkinson, J. Juola (1974)
Search and decision processes in recognition memory.
R. Malpass, P. Devine (1981)
Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66
A. Treisman, G. Gelade (1980)
A feature-integration theory of attentionCognitive Psychology, 12
D. Ross, J. Read, M. Toglia (2007)
Adult Eyewitness Testimony: Current Trends and Developments
R. C. L. Lindsay, G. L. Wells (1980)
What price justice? Exploring the relationship of lineup fairness to identification accuracyLaw and Human Behavior, 4
R. Ratcliff (1978)
A Theory of Memory Retrieval.Psychological Review, 85
N. Brewer, Nathan Weber, C. Semmler (2007)
A Role for Theory in Eyewitness Identification Research
Steven Smith, R. Lindsay, Sean Pryke, Jennifer Dysart (2001)
Postdictors of eyewitness errors: Can false identifications be diagnosed in the cross-race situation?Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 7
F. Pons, M. Rosnay, R. Sternberg (2000)
The nature of cognitionSwiss Journal of Psychology, 59
M. Humphreys, D. Krantz, R. Atkinson, R. Luce, P. Suppes (1976)
Contemporary Developments in Mathematical PsychologyAmerican Journal of Psychology, 89
D. Dunning, Scott Perretta (2002)
Automaticity and eyewitness accuracy: a 10- to 12-second rule for distinguishing accurate from inaccurate positive identifications.The Journal of applied psychology, 87 5
Eyewitness identification research has reliably shown that accurate identifications are faster than inaccurate identifications. Recently, D. Dunning and S. Perretta (2002) claimed that an identification latency of 10–12 s not only best discriminates between accurate and inaccurate identifications but also produces extremely high accuracy rates, approaching 90%. Consistent with predictions from recognition memory theory, however, we show that the optimum time boundary varies with overall response latency under manipulations of retention interval and nominal lineup size, and that the accuracy rate inside the optimum time boundary is much less impressive than previously reported. We outline directions for clarifying the accuracy and latency relationship to assist the reliable diagnosis of identification accuracy.
Law and Human Behavior – Springer Journals
Published: Apr 28, 2006
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.