title: Postdictors of eyewitness errors: can false identifications be diagnosed?
abstract: Eyewitness researchers have "postdicted" identification accuracy using witness confidence (S. L. Sporer, S. Penrod, D. Read, & B. Cutler, 1995), response latency (S. L. Sporer, 1993, 1994), and endorsement of statements consistent with using relative versus absolute judgment strategies (D. Dunning & L. B. Stern, 1994; R. C. L. Lindsay & K. Bellinger, 1999). All of these measures were collected from 321 introductory psychology students who had viewed a staged crime and completed a lineup identification task. Some participants received feedback after identification (G. L. Wells & A. L. Bradfield, 1998). Lineup fairness was also used as a postdictor of eyewitness accuracy. Discriminant function analysis indicated that 75.2% of choosers and 63.0% of nonchoosers were correctly classified. Decision time and lineup fairness were the best postdictors of accuracy. The implications for postdicting real eyewitness decisions are discussed.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. ssmith1@stmarys.ca
authors.forename: S M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: R C
authors.initials: RC
authors.lastname: Lindsay
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Pryke
mesh_terms: D003415:Crime; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires