Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The reliability of eyewitness identification

The role of system and estimator variables

  • Articles
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

This study examines the effects of 14 estimator variables (e.g., disguise of robber, exposure time, weapon visibility) and system variables (e.g., lineup instructions, exposure to mugshots) on a number of measures of eyewitness performance: identification accuracy, choosing rates, confidence in lineup choice, relation between confidence and identification accuracy, memory for peripheral details, memory for physical characteristics of target, and time estimates. Subjects viewed a videotaped reenactment of an armed robbery and later attempted an identification. Characteristics of the videotape and lineup task were manipulated. Prominent findings were as follows: identification accuracy was affected by both estimator and system variables including disguise of robber, weapon visibility, elaboration instructions, and lineup instructions. Memory for peripheral details was positively correlated with choosing on the identification task but negatively correlated with identification accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barkowitz, P., & Brigham, J. C. (1982). Recognition of faces: Own-race bias, incentive, and time delay.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 255–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazelon, D. L. (1980) Review of “Eyewitness Testimony” by Elizabeth Loftus and “The Psychology of Eyewitness Testimony” by A. Daniel Yarmey.Psychology Today, 13, 102–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bermant, G. (1986) Two conjectures about the issue of expert testimony.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 97–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bothwell, R. K., Deffenbacher, K. A., & Brigham, J. C. (in press). Correlation of confidence and accuracy: The optimality hypothesis revised.Journal of Applied Psychology.

  • Brigham, J. C. (1981). The accuracy of eyewitness evidence: How do attorneys see it?The Florida Bar Journal, 55, 714–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigham, J. C. (1986).Distinctiveness of appearance as a moderator variable in the confidence-accuracy relationship in facial identifications. Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University.

  • Brigham, J. C. & Bothwell, R. K. (1982). The ability of prospective jurors to estimate the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.Law and Human Behavior, 1, 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigham, J. C., & Wolfskeil, M. P. (1983). Opinions of attorneys and law enforcement personnel on the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.Law and Human Behavior, 9, 337–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigham, J. C., Maass, A., Snyder, L. D., & Spaulding, K. (1982). Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in a field setting.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42, 673–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, D. E. & Broadbent, M. H. P. (1977) Effects of recognition on subsequent recall: Comments on “Determinants of recognition and recall: Accessibility and generation” by Rabinowitz, Mandler, and Patterson.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 85, 330–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckhout, R. (1974). Eyewitness testimony.Scientific American, 231, 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckhout, R., Alper, A., Chern, S., Silverberg, G., & Slomovits, M. (1974). Determinants of eyewitness performance on a lineup.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 4, 191–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckhout, R., Figueroa, D., & Hoff, E. (1975). Eyewitness identification: Effects of suggestion and bias in identification from photographs.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 6, 71–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, B. R., & Hollin, C. (1981). Effects of the type of incident and the number of perpetrators on eyewitness memory.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 364–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, B. R., & Scott, J. (1978). Individual and situational findings in eyewitness testimony.Journal of Applied Psychology 63, 352–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W. G., & Cox, G. M. (1957).Experimental designs (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Courtois, M. R., & Mueller, J. H. (1981) Target and distractor typicality in facial recognition.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 639–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1986a).Calibrating confidence and accuracy: Recognizing faces. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1986b).Improving the reliability of eyewitness identifications: Lineup construction and presentation. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., O'Rourke, T. E., & Martens, T. K. (1986). Unconfounding the effects of context cues on eyewitness identification accuracy.Social Behavior, 1, 113–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (in press). Jury decisionmaking in eyewitness identification cases.Law and Human Behavior.

  • Davies, G., Shepherd, J., & Ellis, H. (1979). Effects of interpolated mugshot exposure on accuracy of eyewitness identification.Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 232–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deffenbacher, K. A. (1980). Eyewitness accuracy and confidence: Can we infer anything about their relationship?Law and Human Behavior, 4, 243–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deffenbacher, K. A., & Loftus, E. F. (1982). Do jurors share a common understanding concerning eyewitness behavior?Law and Human Behavior, 6, 15–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deffenbacher, K. A., Leu, J. R., & Brown, E. L. (1979).Remembering faces and their immediate context. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Phoenix.

  • Deffenbacher, K. A., Carr, T. H., & Leu, J. R. (1981) Memory for words, pictures, and faces: Retroactive interference, forgetting, and reminiscence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 299–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, Rt. Hon. Lord Patrick (chair). (1976)Report to the secretary of state for the house department of the departmental committee on evidence of identification in criminal cases. London: Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterbrook, J. A. (1959). The effect of emotion on the utilization and organization of behavior.Psychological Review, 66, 183–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flexser, A. J., & Tulving, E. (1978). Retrieval independence in recognition and recall.Psychological Review, 85, 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazzini, S. F. (1981). Review of eyewitness testimony.The Yale Review, 70, XVIII-XX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, A. G., Johnson, K. S., & Chance, J. (1979). Does fluency of face description imply superior face recognition?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13, 15–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosch, H. M., Leippe, M. R., Marchioni, P. M., & Cooper, D. S. (1984). Victimization, self-monitoring, and eyewitness identification.Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 280–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howells, T. H. (1938). A study of ability to recognize faces.Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 33, 124–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C., & Scott, B. (1976).Eyewitness testimony and suspect identification as a function of arousal, sex of witness, and scheduling of interrogation. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.

  • Kassin, S. M. (1985). Eyewitness identification: Retrospective self-awareness and the accuracy-confidence correlation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 878–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A. (1985). Quantitative methods for social psychology. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.),The handbook of social psychology (3rd Ed. Vol. 1, pp. 487–508). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konečni, V. J., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1986). Courtroom testimony by psychologists on eyewitness identification issues: Critical notes and reflections.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 117–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krafka, C., & Penrod, S. D. (1985). Reinstatement of context in a field experiment of eyewitness identification.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 58–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krouse, F. L. (1981). Effects of pose, pose change, and delay on face recognition performance.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 651–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laughery, K. R., Alexander, J. F., & Lane, A. B. (1971). Recognition of human faces: Effects of target exposure time, target position, and type of photograph.Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 490–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laughery, K. R., Fessler, P. K., Lenorovitz, D. R., & Yoblick, D. A. (1974). Time delay and similarity effects in facial recognition.Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 490–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leippe, M. R. (1980). Effects of integrative memorial and cognitive processes on the correspondence of eyewitness accuracy and confidence.Law and Human Behavior, 4, 261–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, F. J., & Tapp, J. L. (1973). The psychology of criminal identification: The gap from Wade to Kirby.University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 121, 1079–1131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: State of the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, and A. Tversky (Eds.),Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, R. C. L., & Wells, G. L. (1985) Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, R. C. L., Wells, G. L., & Rumpel, C. M. (1981). Can people detect eyewitness identification accuracy within and across situations?Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 79–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, E. F. (1976). Unconscious transference in eyewitness identification.Law and Psychology Review, 2, 93–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, E. F. (1979).Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, E. F. (1983a). Silence is not golden.American Psychologist, 38, 564–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, E. F. (1983b). Whose shadow is crooked?American Psychologist, 38, 576–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, E. F. (1986). Experimental psychologist as advocate or impartial educator.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 63–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981) Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1984) Research on suggestion in lineups and photospreads. In G. L. Wells & E. F. Loftus (Eds.)Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, M., & Egeth, H. (1983a). Eyewitness identification: What can a psychologist tell a jury?American Psychologist, 38, 550–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, M., & Egeth, H. (1983b). A time to speak, or a time to keep silence?American Psychologist, 38, 573–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, M., Egeth, H., & McKenna, J. (1986). The experimental psychologist in court: The ethics of expert testimony.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, J. H., Carlomusto, M., & Goldstein, A. G. (1978). Orienting task and study time in facial recognition.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 11, 313–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neil vs. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 93 S. Ct. 375; 34 L. Ed. 2d 401 (1972).

  • Penrod, S., Loftus, E. F., Winkler, J. D. (1982). Eyewitness reliability. In R. Bray, & N. Kerr (Eds.),The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigott, M. A., & Brigham, J. C. (1985). The relationship between accuracy of prior description and facial recognition.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 547–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahaim, G. L., and Brodsky, S. L. (1981).Empirical evidence versus common sense: Juror and lawyer knowledge of eyewitness accuracy. Unpublished manuscript, University of Alabama.

  • Sanders, G. S., & Warnick, D. (1980). Some conditions maximizing eyewitness accuracy: A learning memory model.Journal of Criminal Justice, 8, 395–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, P. & Penrod, S. D. (1986). A meta-analysis of the facial identification literature.Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slack, A. T., & Penrod, S. (1982).Facial recognition in eyewitness testimony. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin at Madison.

  • Stein, J. A. (1981). Review of eyewitness testimony.Trial Diplomacy Journal, 4, 61–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, E. D., & Sugarman, R. C. (1972). The effect of certain distractions on identification by witnesses. In A. Zavala, J. J. Paley, & R. R. J. Gallati (Eds.),Personal appearance identification. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, P. M. (1965).Eyewitness identification in criminal cases. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warnick, D. H., & Sanders, G. S. (1980). Why do eyewitnesses make so many mistakes?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 362–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, J. (1981). Review of eyewitness testimony.Columbia Law Review, 81, 441–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness testimony research: System variables and estimator variables.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546–1557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L. (1984). How adequate is human intuition for judging eyewitness testimony? In G. L. Wells, & E. F. Loftus (Eds.),Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L. (1985). Verbal descriptions of faces from memory: Are they diagnostic of identification accuracy?,Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 619–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Leippe, M. R. (1981). How do triers of fact infer the accuracy of eyewitness identifications? Using memory for peripheral detail can be misleading.Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 682–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1985). Methodological notes on the accuracy-confidence relationship in eyewitness identifications.Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 413–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Murray, D. M. (1983). What can psychology say about theNeil v. Biggers criteria for judging eyewitness accuracy.Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 347–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., & Murray, D. M. (1984). Eyewitness confidence. In G. L. Wells, & E. F. Loftus, (Eds.),Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L. & Ferguson, T. J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification.Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C. L., & Tousignant, J. P. (1980). Effects of expert psychological advice on human performance in judging the validity of eyewitness testimony.Law and Human Behavior, 4, 275–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woocher, F. D. (1977). Did your eyes deceive you? Expert psychological testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identification.Stanford Law Review, 29, 969–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woocher, F. D. (1986). Legal principles governing expert testimony by experimental psychologists.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 47–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarmey, A. D. (1986). Ethical responsibilities governing the statements experimental psychologists make in expert testimony.Law and Human Behavior, 10, 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarmey, A. D., & Jones, H. P. T. (1983). Accuracy of memory of male and female eyewitnesses to criminal assault and rape.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 89–92.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florida International University, Florida, USA

    Brian L. Cutler & Steven D. Penrod

  2. Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

    Todd K. Martens

Authors
  1. Brian L. Cutler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven D. Penrod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Todd K. Martens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research was funded by the National Science Foundation under grant SES-8411721 and by the National Institute of Justice under grant No. 84-IJ-CX-0010 to the second author. Carol Krafka and Peter Shapiro were instrumental in the planning of this research. In addition, we wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript, and Mark Bartells, Karla Bishell, James Coward, Michael Hart, Thomas O'Rourke, and Todd Ripple for their assistance with various phases of this research.

About this article

Cite this article

Cutler, B.L., Penrod, S.D. & Martens, T.K. The reliability of eyewitness identification. Law Hum Behav 11, 233–258 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044644

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044644

Keywords

Search

Navigation