Class notes EYEWITNESS FACE RECOGNITION AND EYEWITNESS ACCURACY IN APPLIED CONTEXTS
8 views 0 purchase
Course
Language and Communication
Institution
The University Of Kent (UKC)
EYEWITNESS
FACE RECOGNITION AND EYEWITNESS ACCURACY IN APPLIED CONTEXTS
face recognition task -> cognitive processing
• Eyewitnesses
• Variables affecting accuracy
• Changes to police procedure
• Developing areas
• other applied contexts for face perception
Eyewitness face recognition and eyewitness accuracy in applied contexts
Subjects
match trials vs mismatch
state of eyewitness when they saw the crime
police and criminal evidence
practical application of the ci kebbell amp wagstaff
1996 evaluating the ci
system variable beh
Written for
The University of Kent (UKC)
The University of Kent
Language and Communication
All documents for this subject (8)
Seller
Follow
rizzidays
Reviews received
Content preview
EYEWITNESS
FACE RECOGNITION AND EYEWITNESS ACCURACY IN APPLIED CONTEXTS
face recognition task -> cognitive processing
• Eyewitnesses
• Variables affecting accuracy
• Changes to police procedure
• Developing areas
• other applied contexts for face perception
• Perception is not as reliable as we might expect: illusions are hard to be perceived accurately
Memory -> School Play, when remembering you remember it as the audience saw you: mis-
reconstruct memory, memory is reconstructed falsely
• Attention is quite limited
• Demonstrate that perception, attention, memory
Systems that we cannot rely on to the extent we would like to
Eye witness processing-> requires accurate and reliable process
•
Filler identification rates in actual cases
10 faces line up
one is the suspect
*covered in black, definitely not the perpetrators of the crime, certainly innocent
Verifiable misidentification: wrong selection
19.9% of 1561 cases
21% of 843 cases
21.6% of 119 cases
THE INNOCENT PROJECT
Organisation's purpose is to exonerate people that were wrongly convicted of crimes
Numerous miscarriages of justice
Victims serving time wrongly due to incorrect eyewitnesses.
Death penalty in US- wrongly executed
Advances in DNA evidence to prove that the person could not have committed the crime
Eyewitnesses ways of responding when picking someone from lineups
a) pick face
b) declare he is not there
Target is n7, if he is present If target is not present in line-up
Target present line-up : Selected target = “hit “he’s not there” = correct rejection
response”; “It’s number 9” = false positive
other target selected = “misidentification”
“He’s not there” = a “miss”
, Accuracy in this task
Target present 70% hits
Target-absent 30% false positives; 70% correct hits
* accuracy not perfect
DIFFICULTIES IN FACIAL PERCEPTION
Face is not a static object: it changes
Jenkins & Burton, 2011
• Is this low accuracy necessarily bad? Orders this represent fairer test conditions
Thing used to be worse
Touch the perpetrator -> very intimidating and unpleasant situation
• Line up itself is limited by the people who are available to make up the line-up (other prisoners +
guards) Unfair line-up when people are similar
Some of the variables
Distinction seen in the literature
Things police can control Cannot control
“System variables” “Estimated variable” cant control them thus the ef-
fects have to be estimated afterwards
Race of perpetrator -immediately evident (e.g. skin colour, ethnicity)
Eyewitness accuracy is affected by instructions
Malpass & Devine, 1981
-> Informed or not that the culprit might or might not be present in the line up
Informed
Providing instruction (Steblay, 1997)
Minimal reduction (1.9%) of accurate identifications
Large reduction (41.6%) of mistaken identifications
Importance of language
* Instruction to eyewitnesses is fundamental; Accuracy is affected by instructions
Content of line-up: Lineup construction
Not fair test (look totally alike or totally different)
System variables: content
• Selection of fillers is important
• Ideal target should not “stand out” but also should not “blend in”
• Fillers can be based on physical similarity to the target
• fillers can be based on verbal description of eyewitnesses (Wells et al., 1994)
• Remains an active issue and unclear what is the best method (Wells & Olson, 2003)
Tredoux (1998; 1999)
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rizzidays. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $4.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
