The impact of fillers on lineup performance

被引：13
作者：
Wetmore S.A. [1 ]
McAdoo R.M. [2 ]
Gronlund S.D. [2 ]
Neuschatz J.S. [3 ]
机构：
[1] Butler University, Indianapolis, IN
[2] University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
[3] The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL
来源：
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications | / 2卷 / 1期
关键词：
Eyewitness identification; Filler siphoning; Showups; Simultaneous and sequential lineups; WITNESS model;
D O I：
10.1186/s41235-017-0084-1
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Filler siphoning theory posits that the presence of fillers (known innocents) in a lineup protects an innocent suspect from being chosen by siphoning choices away from that innocent suspect. This mechanism has been proposed as an explanation for why simultaneous lineups (viewing all lineup members at once) induces better performance than showups (one-person identification procedures). We implemented filler siphoning in a computational model (WITNESS, Clark, Applied Cognitive Psychology 17:629–654, 2003), and explored the impact of the number of fillers (lineup size) and filler quality on simultaneous and sequential lineups (viewing lineups members in sequence), and compared both to showups. In limited situations, we found that filler siphoning can produce a simultaneous lineup performance advantage, but one that is insufficient in magnitude to explain empirical data. However, the magnitude of the empirical simultaneous lineup advantage can be approximated once criterial variability is added to the model. But this modification works by negatively impacting showups rather than promoting more filler siphoning. In sequential lineups, fillers were found to harm performance. Filler siphoning fails to clarify the relationship between simultaneous lineups and sequential lineups or showups. By incorporating constructs like filler siphoning and criterial variability into a computational model, and trying to approximate empirical data, we can sort through explanations of eyewitness decision-making, a prerequisite for policy recommendations. © 2017, The Author(s).
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Banks W.P., Signal detection theory and human memory, Psychological Bulletin, 74, pp. 81-99, (1970)
  • [2] Benjamin A.S., Diaz M.L., Wee S., Signal detection with criterion noise: Applications to recognition memory, Psychological Review, 116, pp. 84-115, (2009)
  • [3] Bjork R.A., Why mathematical models?, The American Psychologist, 28, pp. 426-433, (1973)
  • [4] Carlson C.A., Carlson M.A., An evaluation of lineup presentation, weapon presence, and a distinctive feature using ROC analysis, Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, pp. 45-53, (2014)
  • [5] Carlson C.A., Gronlund S.D., Clark S.E., Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, pp. 118-128, (2008)
  • [6] Clare J., Lewandowsky S., Verbalizing facial memory: Criterion effects in verbal overshadowing, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, pp. 739-755, (2004)
  • [7] Clark S.E., A memory and decision model for eyewitness identification, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, pp. 629-654, (2003)
  • [8] Clark S.E., The importance (necessity) of computational modeling for eyewitness identification research, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, pp. 803-813, (2008)
  • [9] Clark S.E., Costs and benefits in eyewitness identification reform: Psychological science and public policy, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, pp. 238-259, (2012)
  • [10] Clark S.E., Erickson M.A., Breneman J., Probative value of absolute and relative judgments in eyewitness identification, Law and Human Behavior, 35, pp. 364-380, (2011)
12345