Guidelines for empirically assessing the fairness of a lineup

Issues regarding the fairness of lineups used for criminal identification are discussed in the context of a distinction between nominal size and functional size. Nominal size (the number of persons in the lineup) is less important for determining the fairness of a lineup than is functional size (the number of lineup members resembling the criminal). Functional size decreases to the extent that the nonsuspect members of the lineup are easily ruled out as not being suspected by the police. The extent to which the identification of the suspect can be considered an independently derived piece of incriminating evidence is positively related to functional size. Empirical estimates of functional size can be obtained through pictures of the corporal lineup from which mock witnesses make guesses of whom they believe the police suspect. A distinction is made between a functional size approach and hypothesis testing approaches. Uses of functional size notions in the court, by police, and in research are discussed.

[1]  E. Borchard,et al.  Convicting the innocent : errors of criminal justice , 1932 .

[2]  G. Wells Applied eyewitness-testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. , 1978 .

[3]  Alvin G. Goldstein,et al.  The effects of discrimination training on the recognition of white and oriental faces , 1973 .

[4]  J. Brigham,et al.  Do “They all look alike?” The Effect of Race, Sex, Experience, and Attitudes on the Ability to Recognize Faces1 , 1978 .

[5]  H. Vann Recent Book: Identification: Eye Witness Identification in Criminal Cases , 1965 .

[6]  Fredric D. Woocher Did Your Eyes Deceive You? Expert Psychological Testimony on the Unreliability of Eyewitness Identification , 1977 .

[7]  F. Levine,et al.  Psychology of Criminal Identification: The Gap From Wade to Kirby , 1973 .

[8]  Law and psychology in conflict , 1966 .

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

[10]  M. R. Leippe,et al.  Crime Seriousness as a Determinant of Accuracy in Eyewitness Identification , 1978 .

[11]  Owen J. Roberts,et al.  Courts on Trial , 1949 .

[12]  W. Hays Statistics for the social sciences , 1973 .

[13]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Confidence in judgment: Persistence of the illusion of validity. , 1978 .

[14]  P. M. Wall Eye-witness identification in criminal cases , 1966 .

[15]  R. Malpass,et al.  Recognition for faces of own and other race. , 1969, Journal of personality and social psychology.