How effective are the cross-examination and expert testimony safeguards? Jurors' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures.
Mock jurors (N = 800) viewed a videotaped trial that included information about a lineup identification procedure. Suggestiveness of the eyewitness identification procedure varied in terms of foil, instruction, and presentation biases. Expert testimony regarding the factors that influence lineup suggestiveness was also manipulated. Criteria included juror ratings of lineup suggestiveness and fairness, ratings of defendant culpability, and verdicts. Jurors were sensitive to foil bias but only minimally sensitive to instruction and presentation biases. Expert testimony enhanced juror sensitivity only to instruction bias. These results have implications for the effectiveness of cross-examination and expert testimony as safeguards against erroneous convictions resulting from mistaken identifications.
Devenport
Jennifer L
JL
Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton 92834-6846, USA. jdevenport@fullerton.edu
Stinson
Veronica
V
Cutler
Brian L
BL
Kravitz
David A
DA
D003415:Crime; D005104:Expert Testimony; D006801:Humans; D008568:Memory; D010465:Perception; D013404:Suggestion; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014743:Videotape Recording