Renan Benigno Saraiva, Inger van Boeijen, Lorraine Hope, Robert Horselenberg, Melanie Sauerland, Peter J. van Koppen
{"title":"目击者元记忆预测有偏和无偏队列的识别性能","authors":"Renan Benigno Saraiva, Inger van Boeijen, Lorraine Hope, Robert Horselenberg, Melanie Sauerland, Peter J. van Koppen","doi":"10.1111/lcrp.12166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate identifications is a challenging issue in the criminal justice system, especially for biased police line-ups. That is because biased line-ups undermine the diagnostic value of accuracy post-dictors such as confidence and decision time. Here, we aimed to test general and eyewitness-specific self-ratings of memory capacity as potential estimators of identification performance that are unaffected by line-up bias.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Participants (<i>N</i> = 744) completed a metamemory assessment consisting of the Multifactorial Metamemory Questionnaire and the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale and took part in a standard eyewitness paradigm. Following the presentation of a mock-crime video, they viewed either biased or unbiased line-ups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Self-ratings of discontentment with eyewitness memory ability were indicative of identification accuracy for both biased and unbiased line-ups. Participants who scored low on eyewitness metamemory factors also displayed a stronger confidence–accuracy calibration than those who scored high.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These results suggest a promising role for self-ratings of memory capacity in the evaluation of eyewitness identifications, while also advancing theory on self-assessments for different memory systems.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/lcrp.12166","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eyewitness metamemory predicts identification performance in biased and unbiased line-ups\",\"authors\":\"Renan Benigno Saraiva, Inger van Boeijen, Lorraine Hope, Robert Horselenberg, Melanie Sauerland, Peter J. van Koppen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lcrp.12166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate identifications is a challenging issue in the criminal justice system, especially for biased police line-ups. That is because biased line-ups undermine the diagnostic value of accuracy post-dictors such as confidence and decision time. Here, we aimed to test general and eyewitness-specific self-ratings of memory capacity as potential estimators of identification performance that are unaffected by line-up bias.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Participants (<i>N</i> = 744) completed a metamemory assessment consisting of the Multifactorial Metamemory Questionnaire and the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale and took part in a standard eyewitness paradigm. Following the presentation of a mock-crime video, they viewed either biased or unbiased line-ups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Self-ratings of discontentment with eyewitness memory ability were indicative of identification accuracy for both biased and unbiased line-ups. Participants who scored low on eyewitness metamemory factors also displayed a stronger confidence–accuracy calibration than those who scored high.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>These results suggest a promising role for self-ratings of memory capacity in the evaluation of eyewitness identifications, while also advancing theory on self-assessments for different memory systems.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/lcrp.12166\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lcrp.12166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Eyewitness metamemory predicts identification performance in biased and unbiased line-ups
Purpose
Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate identifications is a challenging issue in the criminal justice system, especially for biased police line-ups. That is because biased line-ups undermine the diagnostic value of accuracy post-dictors such as confidence and decision time. Here, we aimed to test general and eyewitness-specific self-ratings of memory capacity as potential estimators of identification performance that are unaffected by line-up bias.
Methods
Participants (N = 744) completed a metamemory assessment consisting of the Multifactorial Metamemory Questionnaire and the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale and took part in a standard eyewitness paradigm. Following the presentation of a mock-crime video, they viewed either biased or unbiased line-ups.
Results
Self-ratings of discontentment with eyewitness memory ability were indicative of identification accuracy for both biased and unbiased line-ups. Participants who scored low on eyewitness metamemory factors also displayed a stronger confidence–accuracy calibration than those who scored high.
Conclusions
These results suggest a promising role for self-ratings of memory capacity in the evaluation of eyewitness identifications, while also advancing theory on self-assessments for different memory systems.