Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation.

Eva Rubínová; Ryan J. Fitzgerald; Stefana Juncu; Eva Ribbers; Lorraine Hope; James D. Sauer

doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation.

Eva Rubínová^*, Ryan J. Fitzgerald, Stefana Juncu, Eva Ribbers, Lorraine Hope, James D. Sauer

^*Corresponding author for this work

Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	167–176
Number of pages	10
Journal	Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Volume	10
Issue number	1
Early online date	4 May 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009
Publication status	Published - 2021

Keywords

EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION
face
body
lineup
showup

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221136812030070X#:~:text=Empirical%20article,Photo%20or%20Video%20Presentation%E2%98%86%2C&text=Eyewitnesses%20are%20widely%20believed%20to,from%20photo%20or%20video%20alternatives.Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{fa37093c438f47778b211f031f935abb,

title = "Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation.",

abstract = "Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.",

keywords = "EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION, face, body, lineup, showup",

author = "Eva Rub{\'i}nov{\'a} and Fitzgerald, {Ryan J.} and Stefana Juncu and Eva Ribbers and Lorraine Hope and Sauer, {James D.}",

year = "2021",

doi = "10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

pages = "167–176",

journal = "Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition",

issn = "2211-3681",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation.

AU - Rubínová, Eva

AU - Fitzgerald, Ryan J.

AU - Juncu, Stefana

AU - Ribbers, Eva

AU - Hope, Lorraine

AU - Sauer, James D.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

AB - Eyewitnesses are widely believed to have a better chance of identifying a perpetrator from a live identification procedure than from photo or video alternatives. To test this live superiority hypothesis, prospective students and their parents (N = 1048) became unsuspecting witnesses to staged events and were randomly assigned to live, photo, or video identification procedures. In Experiment 1, participants viewed a single person at the identification procedure. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a lineup of six people. Across experiments, live identification procedures did not improve eyewitness identification performance. The results show that even under experimental settings designed to eliminate the disadvantages of conducting live lineups in practice, live presentation confers no benefit to eyewitnesses.

KW - EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATION

KW - face

KW - body

KW - lineup

KW - showup

U2 - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

DO - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.009

M3 - Article

SN - 2211-3681

VL - 10

SP - 167

EP - 176

JO - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

IS - 1

ER -

Live presentation for eyewitness identification is not superior to photo or video presentation.

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this