Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
MA Small (1993)
Legal psychology and therapeutic jurisprudenceSt. Louis University Law Journal, 37
Rod Lindsay, Karen Bellinger (1999)
Alternatives to the sequential lineup: the importance of controlling the pictures.The Journal of applied psychology, 84 3
A. Tversky (1977)
Features of SimilarityPsychological Review, 84
O. MacLin, Laura Zimmerman, C. Meissner (2005)
PC_Eyewitness: A computerized framework for the administration and practical application of research in eyewitness psychologyBehavior Research Methods, 37
D. McQuiston-Surrett, R. Malpass, C. Tredoux (2006)
Sequential vs. Simultaneous Lineups: A Review of Methods, Data, and Theory.Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 12
R. Lindsay, G. Wells (1980)
What price justice?Law and Human Behavior, 4
G. Wells, Sheila Rydell, Eric Seelau (1993)
The selection of distractors for eyewitness lineupsJournal of Applied Psychology, 78
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
D. Heermann, A. Burkitt (1990)
Computer-Simulation Methods
J. Pozzulo, C. Crescini, J. Lemieux (2008)
Are accurate witnesses more likely to make absolute judgments?International journal of law and psychiatry, 31 6
B. Murdock (1982)
A Theory for the Storage and Retrieval of Item and Associative Information.Psychological Review, 89
S. Clark, S. Gronlund (1996)
Global matching models of recognition memory: How the models match the dataPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3
R. Pike (1984)
Comparison of convolution and matrix distributed memory systems for associative recall and recognition.Psychological Review, 91
S. Clark (2003)
A memory and decision model for eyewitness identificationApplied Cognitive Psychology, 17
J. Clare, S. Lewandowsky (2004)
Verbalizing facial memory: criterion effects in verbal overshadowing.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 30 4
S. Clark, Ryan Godfrey (2009)
Eyewitness identification evidence and innocence riskPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16
R. Lindsay (1999)
Applying applied research: selling the sequential line‐upApplied Cognitive Psychology, 13
R. Malpass, P. Devine (1981)
Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66
G. Wells (1993)
What do we know about eyewitness identification?The American psychologist, 48 5
A. Rattner (1988)
Convicted but innocentLaw and Human Behavior, 12
R Pike (1984)
A comparison of convolution and matrix distributed memory systemsPsychological Review, 91
S. Clark, Tanya Marshall, R. Rosenthal (2009)
Lineup administrator influences on eyewitness identification decisions.Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 15 1
S. Clark, Sherrie Davey (2005)
The Target-to-Foils Shift in Simultaneous and Sequential LineupsLaw and Human Behavior, 29
JA Swets, RM Dawes, J Monahan (2000)
Psychological science can improve diagnostic decisionsPsychological Science in the Public Interest, 1
R. Lindsay, D. Ross, J. Read, M. Toglia (2007)
The Handbook of Eyewitness Psychology: Volume II : Memory for People
J. Wixted (2007)
Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory.Psychological review, 114 1
R. Hastie, Garold Stasser (2000)
Computer simulation methods for social psychology.
C. Goodsell, S. Gronlund, Curt Carlson (2010)
Exploring the Sequential Lineup Advantage Using WITNESSLaw and Human Behavior, 34
S. Gronlund, Curt Carlson, Sarah Dailey, C. Goodsell (2009)
Robustness of the sequential lineup advantage.Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 15 2
B. Schuster (2007)
Police Lineups: Making Eyewitness Identification More Reliable
G. Wells, M. Small, Steven Penrod, R. Malpass, Solomon Fulero, C. Brimacombe (1998)
Eyewitness Identification Procedures: Recommendations for Lineups and PhotospreadsLaw and Human Behavior, 22
R. Lindsay, J. Lea, Jennifer Fulford (1991)
Sequential lineup presentation : technique mattersJournal of Applied Psychology, 76
R. Lindsay, G. Wells (1985)
Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70
J. Ogloff (2000)
Two Steps Forward and One Step Backward: The Law and Psychology Movement(s) in the 20th CenturyLaw and Human Behavior, 24
Jennifer Dysart, R. Lindsay (2006)
Show-up Identifications: Suggestive Technique or Reliable Method?
R. Shiffrin, M. Steyvers (1997)
A model for recognition memory: REM—retrieving effectively from memoryPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4
G. Gigerenzer, D. Goldstein (1996)
Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality.Psychological review, 103 4
W. Kneller, A. Memon, S. Stevenage (2001)
Simultaneous and sequential lineups: Decision processes of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15
Samuel Gross, Kristen Jacoby, Daniel Matheson, Nick Montgomery, S. Patil (2005)
Exonerations in the United States, 1989 through 2003Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 95
C. Luus, G. Wells (1991)
Eyewitness identification and the selection of distracters for lineupsLaw and Human Behavior, 15
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE CAN IMPROVE DIAGNOSTIC DECISIONS
MS Wogalter, RS Malpass, DE McQuiston (2004)
A national survey of U.S. police on preparation and conduct of lineupsPsychology, Crime & Law, 10
J. Sauer, N. Brewer, Nathan Weber (2008)
Multiple confidence estimates as indices of eyewitness memory.Journal of experimental psychology. General, 137 3
S. Clark, J. Tunnicliff (2001)
Selecting Lineup Foils in Eyewitness Identification Experiments: Experimental Control and Real-World SimulationLaw and Human Behavior, 25
DH Kaye (1986)
Quantifying probative valueBoston University Law Review, 66
RCL Lindsay, GL Wells (1980)
What price justice? Exploring the relationship between lineup fairness and identification accuracyLaw and Human Behavior, 4
J. Raaijmakers, R. Shiffrin (1981)
Search of associative memory.Psychological Review, 88
Steven Penrod, R. Hastie (1980)
A computer simulation of jury decision making.Psychological Review, 87
W. Tanner, J. Swets (1954)
A decision-making theory of visual detection.Psychological review, 61 6
M. Wogalter, R. Malpass, Dawn McQuiston (2004)
A NATIONAL SURVEY OF US POLICE ON PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF IDENTIFICATION LINEUPSPsychology, Crime & Law, 10
SE Clark, R Godfrey (2009)
Innocence risk and the probative value of eyewitness identification evidencePsychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16
D. Kaye (1985)
Quantifying Probative ValueEvidence & Evidentiary Procedure eJournal
G. Wells (1984)
The Psychology of Lineup Identifications1Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14
S. Gronlund (2005)
Sequential lineup advantage: contributions of distinctiveness and recollectionApplied Cognitive Psychology, 19
N. Steblay, Jennifer Dysart, S. Fulero, R. Lindsay (2001)
Eyewitness Accuracy Rates in Sequential and Simultaneous Lineup Presentations: A Meta-Analytic ComparisonLaw and Human Behavior, 25
C. Huff, A. Rattner, E. Sagarin (1996)
Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful Conviction and Public Policy
D. Hintzman (1988)
Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review, 95
Curt Carlson, S. Gronlund, S. Clark (2008)
Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage.Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 14 2
C. Meissner, C. Tredoux, J. Parker, O. MacLin (2005)
Eyewitness decisions in simultaneous and sequential lineups: A dual-process signal detection theory analysisMemory & Cognition, 33
Jim Dwyer, Peter Neufeld, Barry Scheck (2000)
Actual Innocence : Five Days to Execution and Other Dispatches from the Wrongly Convicted
S. Clark, Ryan Howell, Sherrie Davey (2008)
Regularities in Eyewitness IdentificationLaw and Human Behavior, 32
R. Brandon, C. Davies (1973)
Wrongful imprisonment;: Mistaken convictions and their consequences
It is well-accepted that eyewitness identification decisions based on relative judgments are less accurate than identification decisions based on absolute judgments. However, the theoretical foundation for this view has not been established. In this study relative and absolute judgments were compared through simulations of the WITNESS model (Clark, Appl Cogn Psychol 17:629–654, 2003) to address the question: Do suspect identifications based on absolute judgments have higher probative value than suspect identifications based on relative judgments? Simulations of the WITNESS model showed a consistent advantage for absolute judgments over relative judgments for suspect-matched lineups. However, simulations of same-foils lineups showed a complex interaction based on the accuracy of memory and the similarity relationships among lineup members.
Law and Human Behavior – Springer Journals
Published: Oct 16, 2010
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.