The damaging effect of confirming feedback on the relation between eyewitness certainty and identification accuracy.
The authors investigated eyewitnesses' retrospective certainty (see G. L. Wells & A. L. Bradfield, 1999). The authors hypothesized that extemal influence from the lineup administrator would damage the certainty-accuracy relation by inflating the retrospective certainty of inaccurate eyewitnesses more than that of accurate eyewitnesses (N = 245). Two variables were manipulated: eyewitness accuracy (through the presence or absence of the culprit in the lineup) and feedback (confirming vs. control). Confirming feedback inflated retrospective certainty more for inaccurate eyewitnesses than for accurate eyewitnesses, significantly reducing the certainty-accuracy relation (from r = .58 in the control condition to r = .37 in the confirming feedback condition). Double-blind testing is recommended for lineups to prevent these external influences on eyewitnesses.
Bradfield
Amy L
AL
Department of Psychology, Bates College, Iowa State University Ames 50011, USA. abradfie@bates.edu
Wells
Gary L
GL
Olson
Elizabeth A
EA
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D003418:Criminology; D030141:Feedback, Psychological; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011939:Mental Recall; D021641:Recognition, Psychology; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014796:Visual Perception