[The effect of suggestibility on eyewitness identifications: A comparison between showups and lineups].

Q4 Psychology
Hiroshi Miura, Yuji Itoh
{"title":"[The effect of suggestibility on eyewitness identifications: A comparison between showups and lineups].","authors":"Hiroshi Miura,&nbsp;Yuji Itoh","doi":"10.4992/jjpsy.87.14073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are two types of eyewitness-identification procedures: showups and lineups. Although the false-identification rate of showups was considered to be higher than that of lineups, experimental research has not always supported the superiority of lineups. Further, suggestibility of showups is believed to produce higher false-identification rates, but no experimental study has manipulated suggestibility. In this study, we manipulated suggestibility; 258 participants performed photo identification in a showup or lineup. The results revealed that the correct-identification rate was higher in the showups than the lineups, and the rate of dangerous false identification for the innocent suspect did not differ between showups and lineups. In lineups alone, the false-identification rate of the high-suggestibility.condition was marginally higher than that of the low-suggestibility condition. The results indicate that suggestibility, which results from the preconception that the perpetrator must exist in the photos, increases false identifications in relative judgments, such as in lineups.</p>","PeriodicalId":53680,"journal":{"name":"Shinrigaku Kenkyu","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4992/jjpsy.87.14073","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shinrigaku Kenkyu","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.87.14073","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There are two types of eyewitness-identification procedures: showups and lineups. Although the false-identification rate of showups was considered to be higher than that of lineups, experimental research has not always supported the superiority of lineups. Further, suggestibility of showups is believed to produce higher false-identification rates, but no experimental study has manipulated suggestibility. In this study, we manipulated suggestibility; 258 participants performed photo identification in a showup or lineup. The results revealed that the correct-identification rate was higher in the showups than the lineups, and the rate of dangerous false identification for the innocent suspect did not differ between showups and lineups. In lineups alone, the false-identification rate of the high-suggestibility.condition was marginally higher than that of the low-suggestibility condition. The results indicate that suggestibility, which results from the preconception that the perpetrator must exist in the photos, increases false identifications in relative judgments, such as in lineups.

[易受暗示性对目击证人辨认的影响:表演和列队之间的比较]。
有两种类型的证人鉴定程序:指认和指认。虽然显示组的误认率被认为高于列队组,但实验研究并不总是支持列队组的优势。此外,暗示被认为会产生更高的错误识别率,但没有实验研究操纵暗示。在这项研究中,我们操纵了易受暗示;258名参与者在展示或列队中进行照片识别。结果显示,指认组的正确率高于指认组,而指认组和指认组之间对无辜嫌疑人的危险错误指认率没有差异。在单独的队列中,高易受暗示者的误认率。低暗示组与低暗示组差异有统计学意义。结果表明,由于人们对照片中肇事者一定存在的先入为主的观念,暗示性增加了相对判断中的错误识别,例如在队列中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Shinrigaku Kenkyu
Shinrigaku Kenkyu Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信