12 resultados para Eyewitness identification accuracy
em Digital Commons at Florida International University
Resumo:
Mistaken eyewitness identifications of innocent lead to more false convictions in the United States than any other cause. In response to concerns about the reliability of eyewitness evidence, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) in 1999 published a Guide for the gathering and preservation of eyewitness evidence by law enforcement personnel. Previous research has shown that eyewitness identifications are more accurate when obtained using procedures recommended in the NIJ Guide. This experiment assessed whether informing jurors about the Guide can improve their ability to discriminate between eyewitness identifications likely to be accurate and those likely to be inaccurate and, if so, how to most effectively provide jurors with such information. ^ Seven hundred sixteen U.S. citizens who reported for criminal jury duty participated. Half of the participant jurors read a summary of an armed robbery trial in which the police followed the NIJ Guide when obtaining an eyewitness identification of the defendant. The other half read about an identical case in which the police did not follow the Guide. Jurors received information about the Guide from a court-appointed expert witness, one of the attorneys in the case, the trial judge, the judge in combination with one of the attorneys, or from no one (in the control groups). Jurors then rendered a verdict in the case and answered questions about the evidence in the case. ^ When an expert witness or the judge (either alone or in combination with one of the attorneys) informed jurors about the Guide, the jurors voted to convict defendants likely to be guilty and to acquit defendants likely to be innocent more often than did uninformed jurors assigned to a control group. These data suggest that informing jurors about the NIJ Guide using expert testimony or instructions from a judge will improve the quality and accuracy of jurors' verdict decisions in cases involving eyewitness identification evidence. However, more research is needed to determine whether the judge will remain an effective source of information about the Guide in a longer, more detailed trial scenario and to learn more about the underlying psychological processes governing the effects observed in this experiment. ^
Resumo:
Given the growing number of wrongful convictions involving faulty eyewitness evidence and the strong reliance by jurors on eyewitness testimony, researchers have sought to develop safeguards to decrease erroneous identifications. While decades of eyewitness research have led to numerous recommendations for the collection of eyewitness evidence, less is known regarding the psychological processes that govern identification responses. The purpose of the current research was to expand the theoretical knowledge of eyewitness identification decisions by exploring two separate memory theories: signal detection theory and dual-process theory. This was accomplished by examining both system and estimator variables in the context of a novel lineup recognition paradigm. Both theories were also examined in conjunction with confidence to determine whether it might add significantly to the understanding of eyewitness memory. ^ In two separate experiments, both an encoding and a retrieval-based manipulation were chosen to examine the application of theory to eyewitness identification decisions. Dual-process estimates were measured through the use of remember-know judgments (Gardiner & Richardson-Klavehn, 2000). In Experiment 1, the effects of divided attention and lineup presentation format (simultaneous vs. sequential) were examined. In Experiment 2, perceptual distance and lineup response deadline were examined. Overall, the results indicated that discrimination and remember judgments (recollection) were generally affected by variations in encoding quality and response criterion and know judgments (familiarity) were generally affected by variations in retrieval options. Specifically, as encoding quality improved, discrimination ability and judgments of recollection increased; and as the retrieval task became more difficult there was a shift toward lenient choosing and more reliance on familiarity. ^ The application of signal detection theory and dual-process theory in the current experiments produced predictable results on both system and estimator variables. These theories were also compared to measures of general confidence, calibration, and diagnosticity. The application of the additional confidence measures in conjunction with signal detection theory and dual-process theory gave a more in-depth explanation than either theory alone. Therefore, the general conclusion is that eyewitness identifications can be understood in a more complete manor by applying theory and examining confidence. Future directions and policy implications are discussed. ^
Resumo:
Showups are a technique of eyewitness identification in which a single suspect is presented to a witness for identification. Showups are controversial. Defense attorneys argue that they are suggestive and place suspects at undue risk of false identification. Prosecutors and police officers argue that showups are an indispensable investigative tool and are no more suggestive than other identification techniques. Are showups probative or perilous? If so, what can be done to improve their accuracy? This investigation converged on this question by addressing three interrelated goals. The first was to examine the effect of two system variables, retention interval and suspect clothing, on showup accuracy. The second was to determine if showups are more suggestive than lineups. The third goal was to explore carryover effects from showups to subsequent lineup identifications. ^ Eyewitness performance was evaluated with the Eyewitness Identification Paradigm. Approximately 500 undergraduate students at FIU witnesses a staged event (i.e., a "crime") in their classrooms and subsequently participated in a showup and/or lineup identification test. Half of the identification tests contained the target (i.e., the "perpetrator") and half contained a target-substitute (i.e., an "innocent suspect"). ^ The results of this study indicated that, overall, showups are not unusually prejudicial and are no more suggestive than lineups. However this study identified two specific conditions under which showups are likely to lead to false identifications of an innocent suspect. First, false identification are likely to occur in showups that are conducted shortly after a crime when the suspect is wearing clothing similar to that worn by the perpetrator. Second, placing an innocent suspect in both a showup and then a lineup substantially increases the chances that the suspect will be falsely identified in the lineup. The implications of these findings for the conduct of eyewitness investigations are discussed. ^
Resumo:
Law enforcement officials routinely rely on eyewitness identification evidence to solve crimes. Nonetheless, this form of evidence is prone to errors. Researchers have previously attempted to examine conditions under which such errors can be reduced. The present study examines whether giving witnesses an explicit not sure response option increases the accuracy of lineup identification decisions. 251 participants watched a mock crime video before viewing a lineup that either included the perpetrator, or was made up of innocent suspects. Results indicated that witnesses provided with a not sure option made fewer false identifications, fewer filler identifications, and a similar number of correct identifications as witnesses who were not provided with this option. Furthermore, these benefits occurred regardless of whether witnesses received otherwise biased or unbiased instructions. Results suggest that the inclusion of an explicit not sure response option is a simple procedure that can increase the quality of eyewitness lineup decisions.
Resumo:
Previous research has examined the validity of behavioral assumptions underlying the presumed effectiveness of safeguards against erroneous conviction resulting from mistaken eyewitness identification. In keeping with this agenda, this study examined juror sensitivity to lineup suggestiveness in the form of foil, instruction, and presentation biases and whether expert psychological testimony further sensitizes jurors to the factors that influence the likelihood of false identifications. One hundred and sixty jury eligible citizens watched versions of a videotaped trial that included information about the identification of the defendant by an eyewitness and that varied the suggestiveness of the eyewitness identification procedure. In addition, half of the mock-jurors heard the testimony of an expert psychologist regarding the factors that influence lineup suggestiveness. Mock-jurors rendered individual verdicts, rated the defendant's culpability and the suggestiveness and fairness of the identification procedure. Results indicated that jurors are somewhat sensitive to foil bias but are insensitive to instruction and presentation biases. No evidence was found to suggest that expert testimony leads to juror skepticism or juror sensitization. These results question the effectiveness of cross-examination and expert testimony as safeguards against erroneous convictions resulting from mistaken identification. ^
Resumo:
The current study investigated the exculpatory value of alibi evidence when presented together with various types of incriminating evidence. Previous research has reported that alibi evidence could weaken the effects of DNA evidence and eyewitness identification. The present study assessed the effectiveness of alibi evidence in counteracting defendant's confession (experiment 1) and eyewitness evidence (experiment 2). In experiment 1, three levels of alibi evidence (none, weak, strong) were combined with three levels of confession evidence (voluntary, elicited under low pressure, elicited under high pressure). Results indicated significant main effects of confession and alibi and an alibi by confession interaction. Of participants exposed to high-pressure confession, those in the strong alibi condition rendered lower guilt estimates than those in the no alibi condition. In experiment 2, three levels of alibi were combined with two levels of eyewitness evidence (bad view, good view). A main effect of alibi was obtained, but no interaction between alibi and eyewitness evidence. ^ An explanation of this pattern is based in part on the Story Model (Pennington & Hastie, 1992) and a novel “culpability threshold” model of juror decision-making. The Story Model suggests that jurors generate verdict stories (interpretations of events consistent with a guilty or not guilty verdict) based on trial evidence. If the evidence in favor of guilt exceeds jurors' threshold for perceiving culpability, jurors will fail to properly consider exonerating evidence. However, when the strength of incriminating evidence does not exceed the jurors' threshold, they are likely to give appropriate consideration to exculpatory evidence in their decisions. ^ Presentation of a reliable confession in Experiment 1 exceeded jurors' culpability threshold and rendered alibi largely irrelevant. In contrast, presentation of a high-pressure confession failed to exceed jurors' culpability threshold, so jurors turned to alibi evidence in their decisions. Similarly, in the second experiment, eyewitness evidence (in general) was not strong enough to surpass the culpability threshold, and thus jurors incorporated alibi evidence in their decisions. A third study is planned to further test this “culpability threshold” model, further explore various types of alibi evidence, and clarify when exculpatory evidence will sufficiently weaken the prosecution's “story.” ^
Resumo:
Historically, memory has been evaluated by examining how much is remembered, however a more recent conception of memory focuses on the accuracy of memories. When using this accuracy-oriented conception of memory, unlike with the quantity-oriented approach, memory does not always deteriorate over time. A possible explanation for this seemingly surprising finding lies in the metacognitive processes of monitoring and control. Use of these processes allows people to withhold responses of which they are unsure, or to adjust the precision of responses to a level that is broad enough to be correct. The ability to accurately report memories has implications for investigators who interview witnesses to crimes, and those who evaluate witness testimony. ^ This research examined the amount of information provided, accuracy, and precision of responses provided during immediate and delayed interviews about a videotaped mock crime. The interview format was manipulated such that a single free narrative response was elicited, or a series of either yes/no or cued questions were asked. Instructions provided by the interviewer indicated to the participants that they should either stress being informative, or being accurate. The interviews were then transcribed and scored. ^ Results indicate that accuracy rates remained stable and high after a one week delay. Compared to those interviewed immediately, after a delay participants provided less information and responses that were less precise. Participants in the free narrative condition were the most accurate. Participants in the cued questions condition provided the most precise responses. Participants in the yes/no questions condition were most likely to say “I don’t know”. The results indicate that people are able to monitor their memories and modify their reports to maintain high accuracy. When control over precision was not possible, such as in the yes/no condition, people said “I don’t know” to maintain accuracy. However when withholding responses and adjusting precision were both possible, people utilized both methods. It seems that concerns that memories reported after a long retention interval might be inaccurate are unfounded. ^
Resumo:
Historically, memory has been evaluated by examining how much is remembered, however a more recent conception of memory focuses on the accuracy of memories. When using this accuracy-oriented conception of memory, unlike with the quantity-oriented approach, memory does not always deteriorate over time. A possible explanation for this seemingly surprising finding lies in the metacognitive processes of monitoring and control. Use of these processes allows people to withhold responses of which they are unsure, or to adjust the precision of responses to a level that is broad enough to be correct. The ability to accurately report memories has implications for investigators who interview witnesses to crimes, and those who evaluate witness testimony. This research examined the amount of information provided, accuracy, and precision of responses provided during immediate and delayed interviews about a videotaped mock crime. The interview format was manipulated such that a single free narrative response was elicited, or a series of either yes/no or cued questions were asked. Instructions provided by the interviewer indicated to the participants that they should either stress being informative, or being accurate. The interviews were then transcribed and scored. Results indicate that accuracy rates remained stable and high after a one week delay. Compared to those interviewed immediately, after a delay participants provided less information and responses that were less precise. Participants in the free narrative condition were the most accurate. Participants in the cued questions condition provided the most precise responses. Participants in the yes/no questions condition were most likely to say “I don’t know”. The results indicate that people are able to monitor their memories and modify their reports to maintain high accuracy. When control over precision was not possible, such as in the yes/no condition, people said “I don’t know” to maintain accuracy. However when withholding responses and adjusting precision were both possible, people utilized both methods. It seems that concerns that memories reported after a long retention interval might be inaccurate are unfounded.
Resumo:
Biological detectors, such as canines, are valuable tools used for the rapid identification of illicit materials. However, recent increased scrutiny over the reliability, field accuracy, and the capabilities of each detection canine is currently being evaluated in the legal system. For example, the Supreme Court case, State of Florida v. Harris, discussed the need for continuous monitoring of canine abilities, thresholds, and search capabilities. As a result, the fallibility of canines for detection was brought to light, as well as a need for further research and understanding of canine detection. This study is two-fold, as it looks to not only create new training aids for canines that can be manipulated for dissipation control, but also investigates canine field accuracy to objects with similar odors to illicit materials. It was the goal of this research to improve upon current canine training aid mimics. Sol-gel polymer training aids, imprinted with the active odor of cocaine, were developed. This novel training aid improved upon the longevity of currently existing training aids, while also provided a way to manipulate the polymer network to alter the dissipation rate of the imprinted active odors. The manipulation of the polymer network could allow handlers to control the abundance of odors presented to their canines, familiarizing themselves to their canine’s capabilities and thresholds, thereby increasing the canines’ strength in court. The field accuracy of detection canines was recently called into question during the Supreme Court case, State of Florida v. Jardines, where it was argued that if cocaine’s active odor, methyl benzoate, was found to be produced by the popular landscaping flower, snapdragons, canines will false alert to said flowers. Therefore, snapdragon flowers were grown and tested both in the laboratory and in the field to determine the odors produced by snapdragon flowers; the persistence of these odors once flowers have been cut; and whether detection canines will alert to both growing and cut flowers during a blind search scenario. Results revealed that although methyl benzoate is produced by snapdragon flowers, certified narcotics detection canines can distinguish cocaine’s odor profile from that of snapdragon flowers and will not alert.
Resumo:
SmartWater is a chemical taggant used as a crime deterrent. The chemical taggant is a colorless liquid that fluoresces yellow under ultra-violet (UV) light and contains distinctive, identifiable and traceable elemental composition. For instance, upon a break and entry scenario, the burglar is sprayed with a solution that has an elemental signature custom-made to a specific location. The residues of this taggant persist on skin and other objects and can be easily recovered for further analysis. The product has been effectively used in Europe as a crime deterrent and has been recently introduced in South Florida. In 2014, Fourt Lauderdale Police Department reported the use of SmartWater products with a reduction in burglaries of 14% [1]. The International Forensic Research Institute (IFRI) at FIU validated the scientific foundation of the methods of recovery and analysis of these chemical tagging systems using LA-ICP-MS. Analytical figures of merit of the method such as precision, accuracy, limits of detection, linearity and selectivity are reported in this study. Moreover, blind samples were analyzed by LA-ICP-MS to compare the chemical signatures to the company’s database and evaluate error rates and the accuracy of the method. This study demonstrated that LA-ICP-MS could be used to effectively detect these traceable taggants to assist law enforcement agencies in the United States with cases involving transfer of these forensic coding systems.
Resumo:
Biological detectors, such as canines, are valuable tools used for the rapid identification of illicit materials. However, recent increased scrutiny over the reliability, field accuracy, and the capabilities of each detection canine is currently being evaluated in the legal system. For example, the Supreme Court case, State of Florida v. Harris, discussed the need for continuous monitoring of canine abilities, thresholds, and search capabilities. As a result, the fallibility of canines for detection was brought to light, as well as a need for further research and understanding of canine detection. This study is two-fold, as it looks to not only create new training aids for canines that can be manipulated for dissipation control, but also investigates canine field accuracy to objects with similar odors to illicit materials. ^ It was the goal of this research to improve upon current canine training aid mimics. Sol-gel polymer training aids, imprinted with the active odor of cocaine, were developed. This novel training aid improved upon the longevity of currently existing training aids, while also provided a way to manipulate the polymer network to alter the dissipation rate of the imprinted active odors. The manipulation of the polymer network could allow handlers to control the abundance of odors presented to their canines, familiarizing themselves to their canine’s capabilities and thresholds, thereby increasing the canines’ strength in court.^ The field accuracy of detection canines was recently called into question during the Supreme Court case, State of Florida v. Jardines, where it was argued that if cocaine’s active odor, methyl benzoate, was found to be produced by the popular landscaping flower, snapdragons, canines will false alert to said flowers. Therefore, snapdragon flowers were grown and tested both in the laboratory and in the field to determine the odors produced by snapdragon flowers; the persistence of these odors once flowers have been cut; and whether detection canines will alert to both growing and cut flowers during a blind search scenario. Results revealed that although methyl benzoate is produced by snapdragon flowers, certified narcotics detection canines can distinguish cocaine’s odor profile from that of snapdragon flowers and will not alert.^
Resumo:
Several researchers have investigated the effects of alcohol on memory. Few researchers have studied the effects of alcohol on an eyewitness's recall and recognition of crime events. This study proposed to examine the effects of alcohol and viewing conditions on subjects' ability to recall information regarding a videotaped bank robbery. Thirty male and 22 female subjects participated in a 2 (consumption: alcohol v. no alcohol) x 2 (lighting: good v. poor) factorial experiment with Average Accuracy and Total Amount of Information recalled as the primary dependent measures. There was no significant difference between the Intoxicated and Sober subjects regarding the amount of information recalled or their average accuracy. The main effect for lighting conditions and gender differences were also not significant.