Browsing by Person "Penrod, Steven D."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

How to measure lineup fairness: Concurrent and predictive validity of lineup-fairness measures
(Taylor and Francis Group, 2024-02-01) Lee, Jungwon; Mansour, Jamal K.; Penrod, Steven D.
The current study examined the concurrent and predictive validity of four families of lineupfairness measures—mock-witness measures, perceptual ratings, face-similarity algorithms, and resultant assessments (assessments based on eyewitness participants’ responses)—with 40 mock crime/lineup sets. A correlation analysis demonstrated weak or non-significant correlations between the mock-witness measures and the algorithms, but the perceptual ratings correlated significantly with both the mock-witness measures and the algorithms. These findings may reflect different task characteristics—pairwise similarity ratings of two faces versus overall similarity ratings for multiple faces—and suggest how to use algorithms in future eyewitness research. The resultant assessments did not correlate with the other families, but a multilevel analysis showed that only the resultant assessments—which are based on actual eyewitness choices—predicted eyewitness performance reliably. Lineup fairness, as measured using actual eyewitnesses, differs from lineup fairness as measured using the three other approaches.
Validity of mock-witness measures for assessing lineup fairness
(Taylor & Francis, 2021-03-29) Lee, Jungwon; Mansour, Jamal K.; Penrod, Steven D.
Although eyewitness researchers have used mock-witness measures to assess aspects of lineup fairness, they have paid little attention to their validity. The current study tested predictive validity, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of mock-witness measures from a meta-analytic perspective. Overall, mock-witness measures had predictive validity, particularly in target-absent (TA) lineups—the lineup fairness estimated by the measures reliably predicted eyewitnesses’ choosing behaviors and discriminability of a suspect from fillers in TA lineups. However, correlations between lineup fairness estimated by mock-witnesses and eyewitness performance were significant in target-present (TP) lineups only when eyewitnesses had a moderate memory for the perpetrator. Multitrait-multimethod correlations demonstrated significant intradomain correlations between mock-witness measures and other lineup fairness indices and nonsignificant interdomain correlations between the mock-witness measures and indices reflecting memory strength for the perpetrator, which supported convergent validity and discriminant validity, respectively. The implications for research and practice are discussed.