Improving eyewitness identifications from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentation.
研究了顺序呈现列队相比传统同时呈现列队能否减少目击者的错误辨认，实验发现顺序呈现显著降低错误辨认率，且不影响正确辨认率，对司法实践有参考价值。
Staged crime research has demonstrated the utility of controlling the conduct of lineups as a means of reducing false identifications with little or no apparent decline in the rate of correct identifications by eyewitnesses (e.g., Lindsay & Wells, 1980; Malpass & Devine, 1981a;Wells, 1984).A recent variation in lineup procedure shows that a blank lineup, which includes no suspects, can reduce the rate of false identifications if it precedes the actual lineup.However, there are several practical problems that make it unlikely that police will accept this procedure.Sequential lineup presentation is proposed as a means of accomplishing the same goals of reducing false identifications with little or no loss in accurate identifications.A crime was staged for 240 unsuspecting eyewitnesses either individually or in pairs.One quarter of the eyewitnesses attempted identifications in each of four lineup conditions: Six pictures were presented either simultaneously, as used in traditional procedures, or sequentially, in which yes/no judgments were made for each picture; each procedure either contained the photograph of the criminal-confederate or a picture of a similar looking replacement.Sequential lineup presentation significantly reduced false identifications but did not significantly influence correct identifications when compared with the simultaneous procedure.This resulted in an overall increase in diagnosticity ratio (Wells & Lindsay, 1980) using the sequential procedure.The data are interpreted as supporting the conclusion that sequential presentation of lineups can reduce false identifications of innocent suspects by reducing eyewitnesses' reliance on relativejudgment processes.Wells (1978) argued that two types of (Loftus, 1979); however, relatively little stagedvariables could be distinguished in eyewitness crime, system-variable research has dealt with research: (a) estimator variables, such as race issues of eyewitness identification.or sex, which may affect eyewitness accuracy Investigation of eyewitness identification but are not controllable in actual cases and accuracy has demonstrated considerable vari-(b) system variables, such as lineup structure, ance in the rate of correct and false identifiwhich not only affect accuracy but also can cations.In particular, false identifications of be controlled.The potential value of re-innocent people have been obtained from as searching system variables is as a means of few as 12% (Leippe, Wells, & Ostrom, 1978) improving on current procedures.To date, or as many as 78% (Malpass & Devine, system-variable research has been conducted 198 la) of the subjects in some conditions of on questioning procedures, and the resultant staged crime experiments.If this variance in accuracy of eyewitness memory has been rate of false identification is produced by reflected in descriptions of people and events differences in system variables, substantial _ reductions in the risk of real world identifi-_