Repository logo
 

Some witnesses are better than others

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorDarling, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Douglas
dc.contributor.authorHellmann, Jens Hinrich
dc.contributor.authorMemon, Amina
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-29T21:29:19Z
dc.date.available2018-06-29T21:29:19Z
dc.date.issued2009-09
dc.description.abstractThis paper reports a single study in which individual differences in visual processing were assessed in comparison with participants' ability to identify a culprit from a lineup. There were two parts to the study, separated by several weeks. In the first part, participants were asked to report on the global and local aspects of stimuli (first used by Navon (1977)) comprising large letters made up of small individual letters. Measures were taken of the degree of interference caused when the letters conflicted (e.g. a large letter P composed of small letter Ss). In the second part of the study, participants viewed a video of a crime, and subsequently attempted to identify the culprit from a lineup. We found that there was an association between the interference caused by conflicting global information when participants were reporting local letters, and identification performance. Those participants that were most susceptible to global interference identified the culprit more often than those who were the least susceptible to conflicting global information. These results establish a relationship between an individual differences measure of global/local processing and eyewitness recognition performance, suggesting that participants with a relative global processing bias might make better eyewitnesses. 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.description.eprintid688
dc.description.facultydiv_PaS
dc.description.ispublishedpub
dc.description.number4
dc.description.referencetextBothwell et al., 1989 R.K. Bothwell, J.C. Brigham and R.S. Malpass, Cross-racial identification of faces, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 15 (1989), pp. 19-25 Chiroro and Valentine, 1995 P. Chiroro and T. Valentine, An investigation of the contact hypothesis of the own-race bias in face recognition, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 48A (1995), pp. 879-894 Darling et al., 2008 S. Darling, T. Valentine and A. Memon, Selection of lineup foils in operational contexts, Applied Cognitive Psychology 22 (2008), pp. 159-169 Dunning and Stern, 1994 D. Dunning and L.B. Stern, Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate eyewitness identifications via inquiries about decision processes, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (1994), pp. 818-835 Lawson, 2007 R. Lawson, Local and global processing biases fail to influence face, object, and word recognition, Visual Cognition 15 (2007), pp. 710-740 Macrae and Lewis, 2002 C.N. Macrae and H.L. Lewis, Do I know you? Processing orientation and face recognition, Psychological Science 13 (2002), pp. 194-196 Martin and Macrae, in press Martin, D., & Macrae, C. N. (in press). Processing style and person recognition: Exploring the face inversion effect. Visual Cognition. Megreya and Burton, 2006 A.M. Megreya and A.M. Burton, Unfamiliar faces are not faces: Evidence from a matching task, Memory and Cognition 34 (2006), pp. 865-876. Meissner and Brigham, 2001 C.A. Meissner and J.C. Brigham, Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 7 (2001), pp. 3-35 Navon, 1977 D. Navon, Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception, Cognitive Psychology 9 (1977), pp. 353-383 Perfect, 2003 T.J. Perfect, Local processing bias impairs lineup performance, Psychological Reports 93 (2003), pp. 393-394 Perfect et al., 2007 T.J. Perfect, I. Dennis and A. Snell, The effects of local and global processing orientation on eyewitness identification performance, Memory 15 (2007), pp. 784-798 Perfect et al., 2008 T.J. Perfect, N.J. Weston, I. Dennis and A. Snell, The effects of precedence on Navon-induced processing bias in face recognition, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 61 (2008), pp. 1479-1486 Schooler and Engstler-Schooler, 1990 J.W. Schooler and T.Y. Engstler-Schooler, Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid, Cognitive Psychology 22 (1990), pp. 36-71 Searcy et al., 1999 J.H. Searcy, J.C. Bartlett and A. Memon, Age differences in accuracy and choosing in eyewitness identification and face recognition, Memory and Cognition 27 (1999), pp. 538-552. Searcy et al., 2000 J. Searcy, J.C. Bartlett and A. Memon, Influence of post-event narratives, lineup conditions and individual differences on false identification by young and older eyewitnesses, Legal and Criminological Psychology 5 (2000), pp. 219-235 Shapiro and Penrod, 1986 P.N. Shapiro and S. Penrod, Meta-analysis of facial identification studies, Psychological Bulletin 100 (1986), pp. 139-156 Steblay, 1997 N.M. Steblay, Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects, Law and Human Behavior 21 (1997), pp. 283-298 Tanaka and Farah, 1993 J.W. Tanaka and M.J. Farah, Parts and wholes in face recognition, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 46A (1993), pp. 225-245 Valentine et al., 2007 T. Valentine, S. Darling and A. Memon, Do strict rules and moving images increase the reliability of sequential identification procedures?, Applied Cognitive Psychology 21 (2007), pp. 933-949 Valentine and Endo, 1992 T. Valentine and M. Endo, Towards an exemplar model of face processing: The effects of race and distinctiveness, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 44A (1992), p. 671 Valentine et al., 2003 T. Valentine, A. Pickering and S. Darling, Characteristics of eyewitness identification that predict the outcome of real lineups, Applied Cognitive Psychology 17 (2003), pp. 969-993 Wells, 1993 G.L. Wells, What do we know about eyewitness identification?, American Psychologist 48 (1993), pp. 553-571 Wells and Bradfield, 1999 G.L. Wells and A.L. Bradfield, Measuring the goodness of lineups: Parameter estimation, question effects, and limits to the mock witness paradigm, Applied Cognitive Psychology 13 (1999), pp. S27-S39 Wells et al., 2000 G.L. Wells, R.S. Malpass, R.C.L. Lindsay, R.P. Fisher, J.W. Turtle and S. Fulero, From the lab to the police station: A successful application of eyewitness research, American Psychologist 55 (2000), pp. 581-598 Weston and Perfect, 2005 N.J. Weston and T.J. Perfect, Effects of processing bias on the recognition of composite face halves, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 12 (2005), pp. 1038-1042. Weston et al., 2008 N.J. Weston, T.J. Perfect, J.W. Schooler and I. Dennis, Navon processing and verbalisation: A holistic/featural distinction, European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 20 (2008), pp. 587-611 Wright and McDaid, 1996 D.B. Wright and A.T. McDaid, Comparing system and estimator variables using data from real lineups, Applied Cognitive Psychology 10 (1996), pp. 75-84 Yin, 1969 R.K. Yin, Looking at upside-down faces, Journal of Experimental Psychology 81 (1969), pp. 141-145
dc.description.statuspub
dc.description.volume47
dc.format.extent369-373
dc.identifierER688
dc.identifier.citationDarling, S., Martin, D., Hellmann, J.H. and Memon, A. (2009) ‘Some witnesses are better than others’, Personality and Individual Differences, 47(4), pp. 369–373. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.010.
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.010
dc.identifier.issn1918869
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.010
dc.identifier.urihttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/688
dc.relation.ispartofPersonality and Individual Differences
dc.subjectFace recognition
dc.subjectGlobal and Local Processing
dc.subjectIdentification Procedures
dc.subjectIndividual Differences
dc.subjectLine-up
dc.subjectNavon Task
dc.titleSome witnesses are better than others
dc.typearticle
dcterms.accessRightsrestricted
qmu.authorDarling, Stephen
rioxxterms.typearticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
eResearch_688.pdf
Size:
164.86 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Psychology, Sociology and Education