The researchers explained this was built into the experiment to mimic the natural passage of time real eyewitness experience between viewing a crime and completing a lineup. After, the participants worked on word scrambles for four-five minutes to prevent them from rehearsing the image of the culprit. The culprit’s face was in view for 45 seconds. In the researchers’ latest study, 3,281 participants watched a 90-second simulated crime video. “It might also make for compelling evidence in court cases when defense lawyers have a witness who is able to say, ‘I’m 100 percent sure it is not that guy.’” Results “If cops use this procedure, they're going to do much better at knowing if they’re on the right track or need to go back to the drawing board,” said Smith. This could indicate that the police’s suspect is innocent. With the new method, the eyewitness might look at the fourth face in the lineup and say the individual was not the culprit with 100 percent confidence. If the second face was a filler, police following the standard lineup procedure would not receive any information about their suspect, the fourth face. To show how this could be beneficial, Ayala gave the example of an eyewitness who selects the second face in a six pack with 60 percent confidence. We’re not getting that with the standard lineup,” said Smith. “This ensures that even when a witness picks a filler or rejects a lineup, they still tell police something that speaks directly to the likelihood that the suspect is guilty or innocent. But then they’d look again at each of the photos they did not select from the first round and answer: how confident are you this is not the culprit? With the researchers’ proposed change, eyewitnesses would still make an initial selection or rejection of the whole lineup and give a confidence rating for their decision. We’re just asking them to tack six confidence questions onto the end." “We're not asking investigators to stop doing standard simultaneous lineups with six packs. “One of the benefits of the rule out procedure is it’s highly feasible,” said Ayala. Over the last three years, they’ve developed and repeatedly tested what they call the “Simultaneous Lineup Plus Rule Out Procedure.” Their latest study, published in Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, adds to their findings that the procedure improves the accuracy of lineups and can help inform investigations. Smith and Nydia Ayala, a fourth-year PhD student, are interested in memory and decision-making in the context of the criminal justice system. “The standard eyewitness line-up is a helpful tool for investigators, but it could be better and provide a lot more information,” said Andrew Smith, a cognitive psychologist and assistant professor at Iowa State. But when an eyewitness picks a filler or rejects the whole lineup, which happens in an estimated 24 percent and 35 percent of lineups, respectively, investigators miss out on potentially valuable evidence. Previous studies have found a high confidence rating from eyewitnesses (i.e., 90 percent or more) implies greater accuracy. Investigators following best practices then ask the witness to rate how confident they are in their decision. The witness selects the person who best matches their memory or rejects the whole lineup if they don’t think the culprit is present. The other five are “fillers ” they fit the description of the culprit, but the investigators know they are innocent. AMES, IA - Iowa State researchers have developed a new procedure to capture more information from eyewitnesses during police investigations and better detect a suspect's guilt or innocence.ĭuring a typical eyewitness lineup, police display a “six pack” of photos.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |