Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Witnessing-Condition Heterogeneity and Witnesses' Versus Investigators' Confidence in the Accuracy of Witnesses' Identification Decisions

Witnessing-Condition Heterogeneity and Witnesses' Versus Investigators' Confidence in the... Undergraduate participants were tested in 144 pairs, with one member of each pair randomly assigned to a “witness” role and the other to an “:investigator” role. Each witness viewed a target person on video under good or poor witnessing conditions and was then interviewed by an investigator, who administered a photo lineup and rated his or her confidence in the witness. Witnesses also (separately) rated their own confidence. Investigators discriminated between accurate and inaccurate witnesses, but did so less well than witnesses' own confidence ratings and were biased toward accepting witnesses' decisions. Moreover, investigators' confidence made no unique contribution to the prediction of witnesses' accuracy. Witnesses' confidence and accuracy were affected in the same direction by witnessing conditions, and there was a substantial confidence–accuracy correlation when data were collapsed across witnessing conditions. Confidence can be strongly indicative of accuracy when witnessing conditions vary widely, and witnesses' confidence may be a better indicator than investigators' http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior Springer Journals

Witnessing-Condition Heterogeneity and Witnesses' Versus Investigators' Confidence in the Accuracy of Witnesses' Identification Decisions

Lindsay, D.; Nilsen, Elizabeth; Read, J.
Law and Human Behavior , Volume 24 (6) – Oct 19, 2004
Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/witnessing-condition-heterogeneity-and-witnesses-versus-investigators-D5I7e07Hc5

References (20)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychology Association
Subject
Psychology; Law and Psychology; Criminology and Criminal Justice, general; Personality and Social Psychology; Community and Environmental Psychology
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1023/A:1005504320565
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Undergraduate participants were tested in 144 pairs, with one member of each pair randomly assigned to a “witness” role and the other to an “:investigator” role. Each witness viewed a target person on video under good or poor witnessing conditions and was then interviewed by an investigator, who administered a photo lineup and rated his or her confidence in the witness. Witnesses also (separately) rated their own confidence. Investigators discriminated between accurate and inaccurate witnesses, but did so less well than witnesses' own confidence ratings and were biased toward accepting witnesses' decisions. Moreover, investigators' confidence made no unique contribution to the prediction of witnesses' accuracy. Witnesses' confidence and accuracy were affected in the same direction by witnessing conditions, and there was a substantial confidence–accuracy correlation when data were collapsed across witnessing conditions. Confidence can be strongly indicative of accuracy when witnessing conditions vary widely, and witnesses' confidence may be a better indicator than investigators'

Journal

Law and Human Behavior – Springer Journals

Published: Oct 19, 2004

There are no references for this article.