The impact of eyewitness identifications from  simultaneous and sequential lineups.
Recent guidelines in the US allow either simultaneous or sequential lineups to be used for eyewitness identification. This paper investigates how potential jurors weight the probative value of the different outcomes from both of these types of lineups. Participants (n=340) were given a description of a case that included some exonerating and some incriminating evidence. There was either a simultaneous or a sequential lineup. Depending on the condition, an eyewitness chose the suspect, chose a filler, or made no identification. The participant had to judge the guilt of the suspect and decide whether to render a guilty verdict. For both simultaneous and sequential lineups an identification had a large effect,increasing the probability of a guilty verdict. There were no reliable effects detected between making no identification and identifying a filler. The effect sizes were similar for simultaneous and sequential lineups. These findings are important for judges and other legal professionals to know for trials involving lineup identifications.
Wright
Daniel B
DB
Psychology Department, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 4EP, UK. DanW@sussex.ac.uk
D003415:Crime; D003416:Criminal Law / Q000379:methods*; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D011939:Mental Recall; D016017:Odds Ratio; D021641:Recognition, Psychology; D014796:Visual Perception