Eyewitness identification: Photographs vs. live models.
- 1 January 1977
- journal article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Law and Human Behavior
- Vol. 1 (2) , 199-206
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01053439
Abstract
In a simulated crime stituation, 3 groups of eyewitnesses viewed 2 target persons through a one-way mirror and were tested for accuracy of identification after dealy periods of 2, 21, or 56 days. Subjects made identifications from either a live “show-up” or by looking at photographs. In both methods of testing only 1 of the 2 targets was actually present in the 5-man array. Results indicated that delay affects number of false alarms, test method affects number of hits. Photographs produced less accurate performance than live show-up. More than 60% of the subjects erroneously selected one of the 4 distractor persons, a finding relevant to the use of eyewitness identification in criminal investigations. Only 28% of the subjects made no errors of identification.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- RECOGNIZING FACESBritish Journal of Psychology, 1975
- Eyewitness TestimonyScientific American, 1974
- The Psychology of Criminal Identification: The Gap from Wade to KirbyUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1973
- Recognition of human faces: Effects of target exposure time, target position, pose position, and type of photograph.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971
- Visual recognition memory for complex configurationsPerception & Psychophysics, 1971
- Looking at upside-down faces.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969
- Why are pictures easier to recall than words?Psychonomic Science, 1968
- A note on long-term recognition memory for pictorial materialPsychonomic Science, 1968
- Recognition memory for random shapes as a function of complexity, association value, and delay.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965