US line-ups outperform UK line-ups
In the USA and the UK, many thousands of police suspects are identified by eyewitnesses every year. Unfortunately, many of those suspects are innocent, which becomes evident when they are exonerated by DNA testing, often after having been imprisoned for years. It is, therefore, imperative to use ide...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The Royal Society
2016-01-01
|
| Series: | Royal Society Open Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.160300 |
| _version_ | 1819026611523026944 |
|---|---|
| author | Travis M. Seale-Carlisle Laura Mickes |
| author_facet | Travis M. Seale-Carlisle Laura Mickes |
| author_sort | Travis M. Seale-Carlisle |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In the USA and the UK, many thousands of police suspects are identified by eyewitnesses every year. Unfortunately, many of those suspects are innocent, which becomes evident when they are exonerated by DNA testing, often after having been imprisoned for years. It is, therefore, imperative to use identification procedures that best enable eyewitnesses to discriminate innocent from guilty suspects. Although police investigators in both countries often administer line-up procedures, the details of how line-ups are presented are quite different and an important direct comparison has yet to be conducted. We investigated whether these two line-up procedures differ in terms of (i) discriminability (using receiver operating characteristic analysis) and (ii) reliability (using confidence–accuracy characteristic analysis). A total of 2249 participants watched a video of a crime and were later tested using either a six-person simultaneous photo line-up procedure (USA) or a nine-person sequential video line-up procedure (UK). US line-up procedure yielded significantly higher discriminability and significantly higher reliability. The results do not pinpoint the reason for the observed difference between the two procedures, but they do suggest that there is much room for improvement with the UK line-up. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T05:29:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-27062ff025c3481380f597914f941bc1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2054-5703 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T05:29:20Z |
| publishDate | 2016-01-01 |
| publisher | The Royal Society |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Royal Society Open Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-27062ff025c3481380f597914f941bc12022-12-21T19:14:34ZengThe Royal SocietyRoyal Society Open Science2054-57032016-01-013910.1098/rsos.160300160300US line-ups outperform UK line-upsTravis M. Seale-CarlisleLaura MickesIn the USA and the UK, many thousands of police suspects are identified by eyewitnesses every year. Unfortunately, many of those suspects are innocent, which becomes evident when they are exonerated by DNA testing, often after having been imprisoned for years. It is, therefore, imperative to use identification procedures that best enable eyewitnesses to discriminate innocent from guilty suspects. Although police investigators in both countries often administer line-up procedures, the details of how line-ups are presented are quite different and an important direct comparison has yet to be conducted. We investigated whether these two line-up procedures differ in terms of (i) discriminability (using receiver operating characteristic analysis) and (ii) reliability (using confidence–accuracy characteristic analysis). A total of 2249 participants watched a video of a crime and were later tested using either a six-person simultaneous photo line-up procedure (USA) or a nine-person sequential video line-up procedure (UK). US line-up procedure yielded significantly higher discriminability and significantly higher reliability. The results do not pinpoint the reason for the observed difference between the two procedures, but they do suggest that there is much room for improvement with the UK line-up.https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.160300eyewitness identificationus line-upuk line-upsimultaneous line-upsequential line-up |
| spellingShingle | Travis M. Seale-Carlisle Laura Mickes US line-ups outperform UK line-ups Royal Society Open Science eyewitness identification us line-up uk line-up simultaneous line-up sequential line-up |
| title | US line-ups outperform UK line-ups |
| title_full | US line-ups outperform UK line-ups |
| title_fullStr | US line-ups outperform UK line-ups |
| title_full_unstemmed | US line-ups outperform UK line-ups |
| title_short | US line-ups outperform UK line-ups |
| title_sort | us line ups outperform uk line ups |
| topic | eyewitness identification us line-up uk line-up simultaneous line-up sequential line-up |
| url | https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsos.160300 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT travismsealecarlisle uslineupsoutperformuklineups AT lauramickes uslineupsoutperformuklineups |