The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: effects of lineup instructions, foil similarity, and target-absent base rates.

Discriminating accurate from mistaken eyewitness identifications is a major issue facing criminal justice systems. This study examined whether eyewitness confidence assists such decisions under a variety of conditions using a confidence-accuracy (CA) calibration approach. Participants (N = 1,200) viewed a simulated crime and attempted 2 separate identifications from 8-person target-present or target-absent lineups. Confidence and accuracy were calibrated for choosers (but not nonchoosers) for both targets under all conditions. Lower overconfidence was associated with higher diagnosticity, lower target-absent base rates, and shorter identification latencies. Although researchers agree that courtroom expressions of confidence are uninformative, our findings indicate that confidence assessments obtained immediately after a positive identification can provide a useful guide for investigators about the likely accuracy of an identification.

[1]  G. Wells,et al.  Eyewitness identification accuracy and response latency: the unruly 10-12-second rule. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[2]  C. C. Chandler,et al.  Studying related pictures can reduce accuracy, but increase confidence, in a modified recognition test , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[3]  N. Olsson,et al.  A comparison of correlation, calibration, and diagnosticity as measures of the confidence-accuracy relationship in witness identification. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  P. Suppes,et al.  Contemporary Developments in Mathematical Psychology , 1976 .

[5]  N. Brewer,et al.  A Role for Theory in Eyewitness Identification Research , 2007 .

[6]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases , 1988 .

[7]  Geoffrey R. Loftus,et al.  Accounts of the confidence-accuracy relation in recognition memory , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[8]  Neil Brewer,et al.  The confidence-accuracy relationship in eyewitness identification: the effects of reflection and disconfirmation on correlation and calibration. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[9]  R. Lindsay,et al.  Can People Detect Eyewitness-Identification Accuracy Within and Across Situations? , 1981 .

[10]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[11]  Phillip L. Ackerman,et al.  What we really know about our abilities and our knowledge , 2002 .

[12]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980 , 1982 .

[13]  G. Wells,et al.  Distortions in Eyewitnesses' Recollections: Can the Postidentification-Feedback Effect Be Moderated? , 1999 .

[14]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Subjective Confidence in Forecasts. , 1982 .

[15]  S. Penrod,et al.  Moderators of the confidence-accuracy correlation in face recognition: The role of information processing and base-rates , 1989 .

[16]  Neil Brewer,et al.  Psychology and law : an empirical perspective , 2005 .

[17]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[18]  P. Juslin,et al.  Realism of confidence in earwitness versus eyewitness identification , 1998 .

[19]  S. L. Sporer,et al.  Eyewitness identification accuracy, confidence, and decision times in simultaneous and sequential lineups , 1993 .

[20]  William R. Ferrell,et al.  A model of calibration for subjective probabilities , 1980 .

[21]  D. Dunning,et al.  Automaticity and eyewitness accuracy: a 10- to 12-second rule for distinguishing accurate from inaccurate positive identifications. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[22]  Decision times and eyewitness identification accuracy in simultaneous and sequential lineups , 1994 .

[23]  Elizabeth A. Nilsen,et al.  Witnessing-Condition Heterogeneity and Witnesses' Versus Investigators' Confidence in the Accuracy of Witnesses' Identification Decisions , 2000, Law and human behavior.

[24]  D. Stephen Lindsay,et al.  Accuracy and Confidence in Person Identification: The Relationship Is Strong When Witnessing Conditions Vary Widely , 1998 .

[25]  Graham Pike,et al.  The visual identification of suspects: procedures and practice , 2002 .

[26]  C. Hollin,et al.  Lay knowledge of eyewitness behaviour: A British survey , 1987 .

[27]  John T Wixted,et al.  In defense of the signal detection interpretation of remember/know judgments , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  Anne Burke,et al.  Effects of Testimonial Inconsistencies and Eyewitness Confidence on Mock-Juror Judgments , 2002, Law and human behavior.

[29]  Roy S. Malpass,et al.  Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. , 1981 .

[30]  G. Mandler.  Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. , 1980 .

[31]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Knowing with Certainty: The Appropriateness of Extreme Confidence. , 1977 .

[32]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  Mistaken Identification: The Eyewitness, Psychology and the Law , 1995 .

[33]  N. Brewer,et al.  Eyewitness Identification Accuracy and Response Latency , 2006, Law and human behavior.

[34]  R. Lindsay,et al.  Does nominal lineup size matter , 1990 .

[35]  Gary L. Wells,et al.  The malleability of eyewitness confidence: co-witness and perseverance effects , 1994 .

[36]  A. Furnham,et al.  Parents’ gender and personality and estimates of their own and their children’s intelligence , 2004 .

[37]  R. Potter,et al.  Perceptions of witness behaviour‐accuracy relationships held by police, lawyers and mock‐jurors , 1999 .

[38]  J. Read,et al.  Adult Eyewitness Testimony: Current Trends and Developments , 2007 .

[39]  B. Murdock,et al.  Strength theory and recognition memory , 1972 .

[40]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  The reliability of eyewitness identification , 1987 .

[41]  R. Lindsay,et al.  Mock-juror belief of accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses , 1989 .

[42]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[43]  D. Vickers.  Decision processes in visual perception , 1979 .

[44]  Carl Martin Allwood,et al.  Stability and variability in the realism of confidence judgments over time, content domain, and gender , 2003 .

[45]  A. Yonelinas.  The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research , 2002 .

[46]  T. Zandt.  ROC curves and confidence judgments in recognition memory. , 2000 .

[47]  Effect of photoarray exposure duration on eyewitness identification accuracy and processing strategy , 2000 .

[48]  S. Clark.  A Re-examination of the Effects of Biased Lineup Instructions in Eyewitness Identification , 2005, Law and human behavior.

[49]  S. Lichtenstein,et al.  Do those who know more also know more about how much they know?*1 , 1977 .

[50]  P. Ellsworth,et al.  Response biases in lineups and showups. , 1993 .

[51]  Ilan Yaniv,et al.  Measures of Discrimination Skill in Probabilistic Judgment , 1991 .

[52]  J. Baranski,et al.  The calibration and resolution of confidence in perceptual judgments , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[53]  Elizabeth A. Olson,et al.  Eyewitness identification: information gain from incriminating and exonerating behaviors. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[54]  Saul M. Kassin,et al.  On the "general acceptance" of eyewitness testimony research. A new survey of the experts. , 2001, American Psychologist.

[55]  R. Malpass,et al.  EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION , 2005 .

[56]  Gary L. Wells,et al.  Measuring Psychological Uncertainty : Verbal Versus Numeric Methods , 2004 .

[57]  B. Bornstein,et al.  " I know I know it, I know I saw it": The stability of the confidence–accuracy relationship across domains , 1999 .

[58]  R. Bull,et al.  Exposure duration: effects on eyewitness accuracy and confidence. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[59]  C. M. Allwood,et al.  The effects of arguments on realism in confidence judgements , 1996 .

[60]  R. Sternberg,et al.  The nature of cognition , 2000 .

[61]  K. Deffenbacher,et al.  Do jurors share a common understanding concerning eyewitness behavior? , 1982 .

[62]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. , 1984, Psychological review.

[63]  Gary L. Wells,et al.  "Good, you identified the suspect": Feedback to eyewitnesses distorts their reports of the witnessing experience. , 1998 .

[64]  The effect of judgment type and confidence scale on confidence-accuracy calibration in face recognition. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[65]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[66]  P. Juslin,et al.  Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: a critical examination of the hard-easy effect. , 2000, Psychological review.

[67]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  CHOOSING, CONFIDENCE, AND ACCURACY : A META-ANALYSIS OF THE CONFIDENCE-ACCURACY RELATION IN EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION STUDIES , 1995 .

[68]  A. Tversky,et al.  Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. , 1994 .

[69]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Reasons for confidence. , 1980 .

[70]  Kenneth A. Deffenbacher,et al.  Correlation of eyewitness accuracy and confidence: Optimality hypothesis revisited. , 1987 .

[71]  G. Wells,et al.  What do we know about eyewitness identification? , 1993, The American psychologist.

[72]  Richard C. Atkinson,et al.  Search and decision processes in recognition memory. , 1974 .

[73]  J. Baranski,et al.  Context, feedback, and the calibration and resolution of confidence in perceptual judgments. , 1997, American Journal of Psychology.

[74]  R. Malpass,et al.  Eyewitness Identification Procedures: Recommendations for Lineups and Photospreads , 1998 .

[75]  G. Wells,et al.  Effects of postidentification feedback on eyewitness identification and nonidentification confidence. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[76]  Kenneth A. Deffenbacher,et al.  Eyewitness accuracy and confidence , 1980 .

[77]  Leif A. Strömwall,et al.  Effects of reiteration, hindsight bias, and memory on realism in eyewitness confidence , 2000 .

[78]  Post-dicting eyewitness accuracy: Confidence, decision-times and person descriptions of choosers and non-choosers , 1992 .

[79]  G. Wells,et al.  The Perceived Validity of Eyewitness Identification Testimony: A Test of the Five Biggers Criteria , 2000, Law and human behavior.

[80]  Henrik Olsson,et al.  Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: a critical examination of the hard-easy effect. , 2000 .

[81]  Geoffrey R. Loftus,et al.  Response time versus accuracy in human memory , 1999 .

[82]  R. Lindsay,et al.  HANDBOOK OF EYEWITNESS PSYCHOLOGY , 2006 .

[83]  N. Steblay,et al.  Social Influence in Eyewitness Recall: A Meta-Analytic Review of Lineup Instruction Effects , 1997 .

[84]  Anders Winman,et al.  Calibration and diagnosticity of confidence in eyewitness identification: Comments on what can be inferred from the low confidence-accuracy correlation , 1996 .

[85]  R. Lindsay,et al.  Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. , 1979, The Journal of applied psychology.

[86]  Elizabeth F. Loftus,et al.  Eyewitness testimony : psychological perspectives , 1984 .

[87]  Neil Brewer,et al.  Confidence-accuracy calibration in absolute and relative face recognition judgments. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[88]  G. Gigerenzer,et al.  Probabilistic mental models: a Brunswikian theory of confidence. , 1991, Psychological review.

[89]  C. Tredoux.  A direct measure of facial similarity and its relation to human similarity perceptions. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.