Premium
When accurate and inaccurate eyewitnesses look the same: a limitation of the ‘pop‐out’ effect and the 10‐ to 12‐second rule
Author(s) -
Ross David F.,
Benton Tanja Rapus,
McDonnell Stephanie,
Metzger Richard,
Silver Christopher
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
applied cognitive psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.719
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1099-0720
pISSN - 0888-4080
DOI - 10.1002/acp.1308
Subject(s) - psychology , eyewitness identification , foil method , identification (biology) , social psychology , computer science , data mining , relation (database) , materials science , botany , biology , composite material
Research has found support for a ‘pop‐out effect’ that occurs when witnesses who accurately identify a criminal from a lineup are faster and uses more automatic processing than inaccurate witnesses who misidentify a foil. We present evidence that this finding may not occur with biased lineups. Witnesses to a mock theft were asked to make a lineup identification and three types of witnesses were compared: (1) accurate witnesses who identified a thief, (2) inaccurate witnesses who misidentified a foil who was more similar looking to the thief than the other lineup foils and (3) inaccurate witnesses who misidentified a foil who was not more similar in appearance to the thief than the other lineup foils. Accurate witnesses who identified the thief and inaccurate witnesses who misidentified a foil more similar to the thief than the other lineup foils were indistinguishable; both were faster, used more automatic recognition processes and were more confident than inaccurate witnesses who identified other foils. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.