PowerPoint presentation for Masters in forensic science thesis you did for me a few months ago

PROJECT TITLE

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED TO NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF FORENSIC SCIENCES

SEPTEMBER 2017

By

Name

Masters Thesis Committee:

Nell Ford, Chairperson

Adrian Lennox, Supervisor

Leslie Barton, Supervisor

MASTERS THESIS APPROVAL FORMS

We certify that we have read the project of Jane E. Doe entitled Instructions for the Preparation of the Masters Thesis and that, in our opinion; it is satisfactory in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Forensic Sciences at National University.

Approved by:

Nell Ford, Chairperson Date:

Adrian Lennox, Supervisor Date:

Leslie Barton, Supervisor Date:

Class Instructor Date

Director of Forensic Sciences Program Date:

Copyright © 1997 by Jane E. Doe

Al Rights Reserved

Abstract

The eyewitness testimony and the identification is the vital part of the hearing in the court and the most effective element for proving the guilt or innocence of any individual in the proceedings of the court. The compromise on this aspect can challenge the reliance on the law. Therefore, it is really very imperative to be sure regarding the reliability of this element. However, after some work done by the prestigious organizations like The Innocence Project, the reliability and dependency of this element has become a significant question mark for the law. This study will be analyzing the factors and various experiments from different studies to prove that either the dependency on this element is in the favor of the law or either there is great uncertainty. The study will be determining the precautions for the laws to take into consideration while making their conviction decision in the light of law.

Keywords: Eyewitness testimony, identification, accuracy

Preface

The focus of thesis remains on the eyewitness testimony and reliability. The purpose of this study is to find out that whether eyewitness testimony and identification could be relied on or not. Various tests and researches will be studied in this study to find out the accuracy factor in the eyewitness testimony and reliability. The factors which could possibly affect the accuracy factor of the same will be brought into the limelight and their implications and strategies for their prevention will be discovered. This study comes with extreme importance as eyewitness testimony and identification is being used in the most critical matter of the society which is law. The future of the society depends upon the validity and the trust factor on the law. So, this study will identify that either it is good to continue with the same practice or are there any improvements required in the whole process.

Eyewitness testimony and the identification are playing an imperative part for proving the crime commitment (Graham, 2003). Over the time, juries consider it as an influential proof against the crimes (Vollen, 2005). However, as per the researchers and various experts in the same field, they do not perceive eyewitness testimony and identification as very authentic one due to its major dependencies. Eyewitness and identification majorly depend upon the inherent sense of human being and also his memory with the help of which witness remembers the perceptions or the scenario which happened in front of his eyes (Wonsowicz, 2012). Nevertheless, a study has presented different results from the last statement, which suggests, that in 99.5 percent cases, the courts have been taking the right decision of conviction by considering the witness testimony and their identification into account (Vollen, 2005). However, it does not resolve the problem, as 0.5 percent wrong conviction in the cases suggests that there were 11,000 punishments given to the innocent people, which they did not commit considering the statistics of the United States of America only (Vollen, 2005). The number is quite devastating and there should be some precautions, which the courts should take into account to lower this number and assure that there, are no persons in the light of law who gets unjust punishment. The social scientists have been studying the behavior of the eyewitnesses from more than a period of 100 years and the laws have taken these studies majorly into account for the preparation of policies regarding law as well as procedures for the courtroom hearings (Arnold, 1906). As per a research, there is a number of cases where the defendant convictions were unjust due to the eye witnessing and testimony, which was false. It comes with no doubt that in most of the criminal court cases, the eyewitness plays an imperative part so there must be some consideration for assuring the reliability and trustiness of the eyewitness. For this to happen, there needs to be a clear understanding regarding the factors, which makes an effect on the reliability of the eyewitnesses maybe in one way or the other. In addition, the evaluation of the judges is really very significant which is either they are competent enough to measure the accuracy of the eyewitness or not. Judges hold a very dignified and responsible position in the courts and it is really very imperative for them to assure that no conviction in the court occurs due to false witnessing or testimony.

1. 1. Problem Statement

As the accuracy of the eye witness testimony and identification is a major concern in the proceedings of the court. Therefore, this study will making a focus on finding out the accuracy of the eyewitness testimony and identification. The eyewitnesses are taken to the court and their witnessing is given high worth in the court but are those witnessing or identification accurate and reliable. If they are then up to which extent. The established research questions for this study will be

1. Is the eyewitness testimony and identification reliable?

2. What is the accuracy rate of eyewitness testimony and identification?

This study will be finding the answers to above-mentioned questions

The study carries extreme importance, as the elements of this study carries utmost importance in the court hearings. The conviction of the criminals and innocently accused individuals are hanging in the balance on the basis of these elements. This study will enable us for utilizing those elements further in the proceedings or not. The limitations of utilizing those elements will be a part of study too, which will provide a benchmark for considering those elements in the court hearings. The elements have been selected on the basis of major concern and issues at the current time. The selection of the elements has been a major issue as the worth of the study depends upon the selection of the elements. Therefore, a prior research made in this regard for the selection of the elements and selection of the elements is on the basis of coherence with major academic researches earlier carried out in the same regard.

Stress: The trauma which is felt by the eyewitness

Weapon focus: Presence of the weapon at the scene diverts the attention of the eyewitness from the actual scene towards the weapon

Show ups: Identification of one person instead of selection from a lineup of suspects

Exposure Time: The duration in which the crime scene was witnessed by the individual

Cross-racial: Identification of criminal from the lineup of suspects of other race.

Hypnotic Retrieval: The period in which the witness is not able to remind all of the proceedings or happenings of the crime scene.

The study will be considering the data and the results from other academic papers, as at this part of the study it is not possible to conduct a survey regarding the beliefs of the experts in the same area. Recognized journals and their publications will be providing the data required for this study. The study will be majorly focusing on the factors, which affects the reliability of the eyewitness and testimony. This study will be analyzing the accuracy level of the same. This study will not consider the parameters or the preventive measures for the avoidance of the same.

Theoretical framework of this study is developed mainly from the theory of signal detection. It was develop in the 1940-1950 and it was implied in the psychophysics research (Green & Swets, 1966) and it was also applied in the memory of recognition (Egan, 1958; Wixted, 2007) and it has also been used in various discipline such as medicine diagnostics (Lusted, 1971), analysis of violence in risk (Mossman, 1994; Rice & Harris, 1995), investigation of the crime (Bennell, Jones, & Melnyk, 2009) and the law (Bell, 1987; DeKay, 1996; Laudan, 2006; Lillquist, 2002).

The Hypothesis plays an imperative role in any study. The hypothesis will assist in finding the answers to the research question mentioned earlier. The hypothesis will be guiding the study in the literature review and will have a major influence on the research methodology, in which this hypothesis will be an imperative part of the collection of the data. After the data collection, the study will be analyzing the data and on the basis of analysis results, the hypothesis will be either proved as right or wrong. That stand with context to hypothesis will enable the study to give an accurate answer regarding the research questions, which are the basis of the study. Following below mentioned hypothesis will be effective for this study, which are:

H1: The eyewitness testimony and identification is not accurate

H2: The eyewitness testimony and identification is not reliable

The study will be observing following arrangement in the upcoming chapters. Chapter 2 will be discussing the literature review regarding the eyewitness testimony and identification. All the theories and the findings from the similar researches will be par study. Chapter 3 will be discussing the research methodologies. The type of the research and the methods utilized for finding the answers to the objectives in this study. The same chapter will be discussing research instruments too. Chapter 4 will be finding out the results obtained from the research. Chapter 5 will be discussing the implications of the results obtained from chapter 4.

There are certain rules, which have been set as general requirements for any eyewitness of the case as by the Federal Rules of Evidence (Graham, 2003). As per a rule, the proceedings will begin with an oath, witness takes this oath to claim that all of his sayings will be truthful and he shall be accountable for any unjust conviction due to his wrong or false statement. Another rule states that it is mandatory for the witness to have knowledge regarding the matter at a personal level. All the witnesses in the normal state have the capacity to collect and recollect facts for perceiving and forming it any desired shape and he is also able to understand the difference in between the truth and the lie (Graham, 2003). Federal Rules of Evidence has lemmatized its circle by bounding the mental capacity where its recognition is much easier. There is a number of factors, which have got the ability to lessen the reliability of the eyewitness.

In perception, stress plays the most imperative role. As per a research, stress and emotional arousal have got all the capability to enhance the performance of any individual and it was first note in 1908 as was presented as Yerkes-Dodson law (Loftus, 1996). After this particular point, the performance tends to go in a negative sense. There is no fix position of this location and it varies largely depending upon the toughness of the task (Loftus, 1996). There is a mild sort of enhancement in the performance due to limited arousal in the emotions as the interest as well as alertness is quite limited in the case (Loftus, 1996). The performance is decreased drastically whenever the emotional arousal cross its higher or lower limit. The Yerkes-Dodson law has originated the weapon focus term, which states that whenever a victim or any person has to face any other individual holding a weapon in his hands then the focus of the victim or witness transfers only to the weapon as well as escape from that area as soon as possible.

Cue Utilization theory is another recognized theory which states that narrowing of focus happens when there is a certain enhancement or arousal in the emotions of one person. This statement provides a brief idea that whenever any person or victim will face an unusual situation with a weapon then his mind will not perceive or consider all the factors on a general basis. The collection of cues in that scenario will be less than the collection in normal scenario (Easterbrook, 1959). Both earlier and later theory puts stress on one thing, which is that if the person had faced the weapon by any mean then the focus on the collection of cues will be limited in nature and the witness is not able to provide all the data in the original form to the other person despite to intentions.

As per another study, it was found that whenever the person faces the weapon then the impact and the focus on that focus is much more and for a long period than exposed to any other thing (Loftus & Messo, 1987). The same study made a claim that the probability of identifying the accused by the witness in such kind of case is quite low. The study involved the participants for the testing purpose and as per the results of the study; only 11 percent witness identified the true defendant. These were the same witnesses, which were exposed to the weapon. The 39 percent witnesses were easily able to identify the suspects but no weapon exposure to these witnesses. It means that the probability of identifying without the exposure of the weapon is much higher (Loftus & Messo, 1987). Hence, the conclusion of the study is that the memory of the witness does not remain reliable when there is an exposure of weapon to them practically.

In another study, witnesses had to identify the criminals of a robbery case. 46 percent witness were easily able to identify the criminals when there was no exposure of the weapons but when there was an exposure of the weapon, the percentage got drop off from 46 to direct 26 percent (Clutter, 1995). These claims and studies easily recognize the fact that the reliability of the witnesses gets much lessen in case of exposure to the weapon.

The race has got a significant role to play in the identification of the criminal and there is an effect on the reliability of identification because of this factor. In a study, 63 percent witnesses were able to recognize the criminal in case of same race but the percentage reduced to 57 percent in case of cross race (Cutler, 1995). The percentage drop off is not that much significant but still, it is an accountable factor.

Similarly, there was a difference in the identification when there was a gender difference involved with those cases where there was no difference in the gender. The percentage drop off was from 76 percent to 72 percent (Cutler, 1995). As per a study, in the identification of rape cases, where black men raped the white women, but 45 percent of the victims recognized the false male (Vollen, 2005). As per another study, there was 10 percent error rate in case of involvement of cross-gender (Shaw, 1994). It is not clear from the studies that what the actual factors are which tends to lessen the reliability but it assures that there is a decrease in the effective identification of the criminal.

In Psychology, there is a very basic principle, which suggests that the individuals normally prefer to view the things as per their expectations (Loftus, 1996). It is quite evident in the statistics of hunting every year where a lot of human die during the hunt down of a deer. It comes with no doubt there is no resemblance in between the human and the dear but when the hunter fails to hunt down the deer for a long time then his expectations raises to extreme possible level and he hunts whatever moving object in front of him thinking them as a deer. As per (Loftus, 1996) these sort of expectations which might even raise for a shorter period but has got all the capability to misguide the perception of the witness and he sees the things as per his expectations. There were similar results in the study done in the same context in 1935 by E.M. Siipola (Loftus, 1996). As per the results of these studies, it is quite obvious that the perceptions of the witnesses could divert because of these temporary expectations.

As per the study by (Loftus, 1996), there is a great compromise in between the observation of the event and their narration as per actual scenario. This factor is an interesting one as in this factor even the witness is not sure regarding his judgment and observation of the scenario as the witness is unable to trust his own words completely. The trust of the witness on himself depends upon the similarity factor in between the statement of him and the statement of the others. When there is any kind of reasonable difference in between the witness statement and the statement from others then the witness normally tries, to make excuses like there was a clear instruction for them to say so or they do not remember the incident completely. Investigators have the opportunity to lessen this kind of excuses from the witness by interrogating them earlier in isolation and taking their clear statement regarding the scenario earlier than the witness communication with any third party. The reason for doing this is to make sure there is no effect on the observations and views of the witness because of the views and observation of any other person (Vollen, 2005).

It comes with no doubt that, the witness of the case could be in much stress especially when he has witnessed a scenario where the criminal made use of a weapon or any other similar harm tool. Being sure regarding the emotional as well as mental state of the witness in not an easy task and most of the researchers prefer the briefing from the witness sometime later after the execution of the crime. Witness reports after some days of the crime are not reliable totally as it is not confirm that whether the individual has returned to its mental peace or not, also the memory as discussed earlier plays a significant role here so blindly trusting the retrospective reports could be harmful to the law as any individual could get a conviction due to false witnessing. In addition to that, researchers made a study regarding the anxiety and stress level of the witnesses at the crime scene (Christianson and Loftus, 1991). The anxiety and stress level aspect was different for most of the witness and the difference was just because of the factors like nature of the crime, closeness to the criminal and event’s duration. Witnessing a crime can lead an individual towards any of two emotional state. The emotional states are defensive and the attentive psychological state. In both of the states, the order of human body function may disturb in different ways but still in both the anxiety and stress level of the individual increases to such an extent where his statement becomes unreliable. As the stress level of the human body increases, a downfall occurs in the memory of the individual and when such thing happens then the focus of the human mind diverts more towards the central details of the scenario or the crime instead of the peripheral details of the crime. In addition, the emotional and neutral mindset of the level also plays a significant role in this regard.

Contrary to these findings, different researchers like (Deffenbacher et al., 1994) made a claim that the emotional stimuli of the individual energize in such kind of scenarios but there is no impact of the same on the stress or anxiety level of the individual. (Deffenbacher et al., 1994) carried out a research by manipulating the stress level of the individual and recorded the results accordingly in that scenario and the results of the same study proved the claim made earlier. However, the same study also stated that there is a certain level of stress, which a human mind can afford, once the stress level crosses that ultimate line then there is a definite drop off in the memory of the individual.

Qualitative research is the main research technique of this study. The study will not be arranging any research or survey on its own due to the limitation of the resources. The study will develop variables and on the basis of those variables, the data will be collected from the surveys and the research’s from other studies. This study will be bringing all the data from other studies in a coherent way and on the basis of results from those studies, this study will be analyzing the data. After analyzing the data carefully, this study will be interpreting and finalizing the results.

This study identifies two type of variables in the study and then this study will collect the data regarding both of those variables for analyzing and interpretation of results. Those two variables are

Independent variables are those variables, which are free in their response. The response of those variables is not depending upon the implication of any other variable. Their response is simultaneous in nature and can go in either direction and in most of the cases, it is unknown and the study has to measure their response either by survey, interviews. However, as this study is qualitative basis so this study will be collecting the data from other studies.

The independent variables of this study are

• Disguise: This variable is indicating the get up of the criminal. As it is not necessary that the criminal was in similar get up during the commitment of crime.

• Weapon Presence: This variable will be taking presence and exposure of weapon into consideration. How the existence and exposure of the weapon affects the true identification of the criminal.

• Violence: This variable got more concern with the factor of violence, which was present during the commitment of crime. This factor will be measuring the dependency of presence and level of violence with the identification of the criminal.

• Retention Interval: This variable takes will measure the effect of span, which was in between the actual crime and the statement from the criminal. This variable will be assisting in finding and evaluating the impact of the longer and shorter time gap in between the statement of the crime and witnessing an actual crime.

• Line Up instruction: This variable will be measuring the effect of instruction given to the witness for the selection of criminals in the specified number of suspects

• Line Up size: The number of suspects standing in the line also plays an imperative part. There will be a variation in the size of the lineup of the criminals and the effect of this variation on the identification of the criminal

• Resemblance of line up Members: It is quite possible that the criminal was not in regular get up and he took the get up of any other person. The effect of resemblance in the lineup and its effect on the identification of the true criminal.

• Voice Samples: If there is an allowance of hearing to the voice of the suspects to the witness, then what is the effect of the same on the identification of true criminal?

• Witness Confidence: The confidence level of the witness will never be constant and it will vary in different situations. This variable will be taking the same factor into account that what was the confidence level over the selection from the suspects and whether that selection was true or not.

Dependent variables are those variables whose response is not simultaneous in nature and their after results are depending majorly on the results achieved from the observation or data of independent variables. As per the nature of the study, the chosen dependent variables are

• True identification of the criminal: The result this variable will be suggesting the percentage of the witness who were able to identify the actual criminal despite of variation in all of the independent variables

• False Identification of the criminal: The results of this variable suggest the percentage of the witness who was not able to identify the criminals may because of the variation in independent variables or any other factor.

The procedure of data collection in this study is basing on the qualitative research method. This study will be collecting the results achieved in context to these variables from recognized literature, journals, and their publications. This study will be analyzing those data for either proving or disproving the hypothesis already developed. The hypothesis results will be providing an answer to research question

As per the results from the relevant literature, there is a good response regarding the identification of the criminal by the witness. The percentage of true identification by the clients came out to be 90 percent. Despite the results achieved from the study, there was no significant variation observed in the true identification of the criminals because of the variation in the independent variables. There was variation in the confidence level of the witness while the identification of the criminal from the number of suspects. The conviction of 450 criminals occurred due to the confidence level 100 percent and the percentage of those hearings by jury members is 51 percent (Shaw and Skolnick, 1994). 37 percent jury members passed the decision of the conviction when the confidence level of eyewitness by 80 percent. The estimation of correct identification of the criminal was ranging in between the 60 percent to 67 percent (Shaw and Skolnick, 1994). The results of the presence and exposure of the weapon are quite different to the results achieved from the literature review in context to jury. The jury gave the decision against the suspect because of the statement by the eyewitness despite the presence and exposure of the weapon in the crime scenario. The percentage of accepting the accuracy of identification and the conviction is 66 percent and 46 percent. The acceptance of the witness in the cases where there was no exposure of the weapon is 54 percent and the percentage of the conviction in similar cases is 30 percent (Shaw and Skolnick, 1994).

In another study, two group of witnesses were presented in front of the jury. There was a comprised of total 40 witnesses in both groups where each group comprised of 20 witnesses. There was a difference in between both groups which was that one group consisted of witness’s whom identification was never claimed after the proceedings of the case. Where a claim was made to the identification of the claims by the other group. 84 percent time’s jury gave priority and believed on the identification of the witnesses who were also true at the first time where 74 percent times, the jury was not in the favor of the witnesses or their identification, which were not true at the first time. It clearly suggests that the decision of the jury depends upon other factors including the testimony of the witness which means that their judgment can go against the favor of the law and their conviction can be wrong (Cutler & Penrod, 1995)

In the initial part of the study, some hypothesis were developed and now at this part of study, it is imperative to relate those hypothesis’s with the end results obtained from this study so to make a clear statement regarding the rejection or approval of the hypothesis.

It comes with no doubt that, all of these results are on the basis of experiment where all the parameters were in control by the research authority. Therefore, the implication of these results in the practical world or in the real-time situation could differ in some way. Amongst the entire factor in which there were variations to check the identification of the suspect, it came to an observation that the confidence level has the most influential impact amongst all of the other factors. It was obvious as the rating of probability and prediction of a verdict and its dependence on the confidence level was well illustrated in the other researches also. This study provided a clear information that the identification of the criminal in between the line of suspect not only depends upon the witness but the jury has a significant role to play in this regard and their perceptiveness differs in between the different witness on the basis of their reputation. It is crucial to note that a greater memory was represented in this study despite to the exposure of the weapon, lineup variation of suspects in terms of size, appearance etc., retention level, and violence involved at the crime scene. It was also observed in the study that the witness did take the benefit of some material for the purpose of recognition but the juries were not that much concerned regarding the utilization of witness factors neither they took the same into account while making the final verdict of the case.

On the basis of above results, the hypothesis developed in our case is proved partially like our hypothesis were regarding the accuracy of the testimony and identification then the above results show us that there is certainly a good percentage in the identification and recognition of the suspect by the witness but the good percentage is not 100 and this is the factor which is restraining us to declare these hypothesis’s totally proved or wrong. As in the conviction, there is no percentage of margin, even 1 percent of wrong decisions are fatal not only for the society but also for the respect of law in the society. As per the final wording the eyewitness testimony and identification is accurate but up to the major extent, not totally. Similarly, the total reliability of the eyewitness testimony and identification is not a good idea and there must be other factors taken into account before passing any conviction or punishment decisions by the courts.

The cases where the eyewitness testimony and identification is an imperative part, then in those cases the judiciary must call on a psychologist and then psychologist plays a significant role in explaining the factors affecting the reliability of the eyewitness testimony and identification. The consideration of eyewitness in the cases is still an unsolved discussion in between the experts of the law and the psychologists. There must be a scientific foundation for the presentation of the eyewitness in the cases of the law. The jury must be taking all the factors into account instead of just the testimony of the eyewitness and his identification. The effective decision making and an increase in abidance of the law can occur by the involvement of expert psychologist in the hearing of the cases so to make sure that no conviction is given in an unfair manner to any individual. The investigator also plays an important role in assuring the reliability and accuracy of eyewitness testimony and identification. Investigator must make sure to arrange the videotape or photo factors in a proper manner so that the eyewitness identification and testimony could be more reliable and accurate.

There is a question mark on the reliability of eyewitness testimony and identification as per the facts found out in the study. However, there are a certain number of ways for enhancing the reliability of eyewitness testimony. The impact of various factors like lineup size, the appearance of the suspects, exposure to weapon, retention period, and violence crime has not got that much impact on the memory of the eyewitness, but they eyewitness testimony is definitely challenged by the confidence level of the witness. Juries do take the factor of eyewitness confidence level into account while making the decision of conviction or punishment. The factors, utilized by the eyewitness for the identification does not raise much concern in the eyes of the jury. The investigators have a great opportunity to ensure the persuasion of the truth and abidance of law by properly administering the live and photo lineups to the video recording of the process of identification.

The judge can also play in imperative part by giving clear instructions to the jury for taking the particular factors into account while making the decision on the dependency of the eyewitness. The sole purpose of the judicial system is to assure the abidance of law and reveal the truth not to give the conviction as much as possible. To provide the justice with integrity, the factor of eyewitness testimony and identification can be taken into account but the factors related to that must be considered too. Because even in one case a wrong decision is passed by the judiciary on the basis of eyewitness testimony then it will not be a great sign for the worth of the law in the society.

As per the study, it comes with no doubt that the eyewitnesses are human, there is a scope of error in their identification and testimony even if there honesty, and co-operation is unquestionable. The identification and testimony can greatly affect because of the confidence and other similar factors possibly in the lesser margin or higher, which varies from an eyewitness to eyewitness. Considering these facts in mind, laws have developed some rules and procedures to be followed for the interrogation of any eyewitness. The most recognized thing in this context is the inclusion and conduction of cognitive interview. These sort of interviews provides the law agencies to get as much accurate information as much possible. This type of interviews is normally missing from the procedures of the regular police like the buildup of a rapture in between the investigator and the eyewitness, which provides the eyewitness enough confidence to share the scene, which happened exactly in front of his eyes. Witness takes some time for reinstatement, which means to remember all the proceedings of the scene in its actual form. The recommendation as per this study is the inclusion of the procedures of which mentioned earlier and the inclusion of psychologist in the crime hearing proceedings.

American Judicature Society. (2011). A test of the simultaneous vs. sequential

Lineup Methods: An initial report of the AJS national eyewitness identification Field Studies. Des Moines, IA: Wells, G.L., Steblay, N.K., & Dysart, J.E.

Bennell, C., Jones, N. J., & Melnyk, T. (2009). Addressing problems with traditional

Crime linking methods using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 14, 293-310

Bell, R. S. (1987). Decision theory and due process: A critique of the Supreme

Court’s lawmaking for burdens of proof. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78, 557-585

Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Improving the reliability of eyewitness

Identification: Lineup construction and presentation. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 73(2), 281-290. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.73.2.281

Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987). Improving the reliability of

Eyewitness identification: Putting context into context. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 72(4), 629-637. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.4.629

Cutler, B.L. & Penrod, S.D. (1995). Mistaken identification: The eyewitness,

Psychology, and the law. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

DeKay, M. L. (1996). The difference between Blackstone-like error ratios and

Probabilistic standards of proof. Law and Social Inquiry, 21, 95-132.

Easterbrook, J. A. (1959). The effect of emotion on cue utilization and the

Organization of behavior. Psychological Review, 66(3), 183–201. Retrieved

From http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/66/3/183.pdf

Egan, J. P. (1958). Recognition memory and the operating characteristic

(Technical Note AFCRC-TN-58-51). Bloomington: Indiana University Hearing and Communication Laboratory.

Garrett, B. L. (2011). Convicting the innocent: Where criminal prosecutions go wrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Graham, M. H. (2003). Federal rules of evidence. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.

Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and

Psychophysics. New York, NY: Wiley.

Kramer, T.H., Buckhout, R. & Eugenio, P. (1990). Weapon focus, arousal, and

Eyewitness memory: Attention must be paid. Law and Human Behavior 14(2)

167-84. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/lhb/14/2/167.html

List, J. A. (1986). Age and schematic differences in the reliability of eyewitness

Testimony. Developmental psychology 22(1) 50-57. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.22.1.50

Loftus, E. (1979). Eyewitness reliability. Science 205(4404) 386.

Loftus, E. (1996). Eyewitness testimony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Loftus, E. F., Loftus, G. R., & Messo, J. (1987). Some facts about “Weapon

Focus.”Law and Human Behavior, 11(1), 55–62.

Lusted, L. B. (1971). Signal detectability and medical decision making. Science, 171, 1217-1219.

Magnussen, S., Melinder, A., Stridbeck, U., & Raja, A. Q. (2010). Beliefs about factors Affecting the reliability of eyewitness testimony: A comparison of judges, jurors And the general public. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 122-133. doi:10.1002/acp.1550

McGough, M. (2012). To err is human: Using science to reduce mistaken eyewitness Identifications in police lineups. NIJ Journal, 270, 30-34.

Memon, A., Mastroberardino, S., & Fraser, J. (2008). Münsterberg's legacy: What

Does eyewitness research tell us about the reliability of eyewitness testimony? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(6), 841-51.

Mossman, D. (1994). Assessing predictions of violence: Being accurate about

Accuracy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 783-792.

Rice, M. E., & Harris, G. T. (1995). Violent recidivism: Assessing predictive validity.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 737-748.

Roberts, A. (2012). Expert evidence on the reliability of eyewitness identification:

Some observations on the justifications for exclusion: Gage v. HM Advocate. International Journal of Evidence and Proof, 16(1), 93-105.

doi: 10.1350/ijep.2012.16.1.393

Laudan, L. (2006). Truth, error, and criminal law: An essay in legal epistemology.

New York, NY: Cambridge.

Lillquist, E. (2002). Recasting reasonable doubt: Detection theory and the virtues of

Variability. University of California Davis Law Review, 36, 85-197

Schacter, D.L., Dawes, R., Jacoby, L.L., Kahneman, D., Lempert, R., Roediger, H.L., & Rosenthal, R. (2007). Policy forum: Studying eyewitness investigations in the field. Law and Human Behavior, 32(1), 1-3. doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9093-9

Scheer, J. B. (2002). The reliability of eyewitness reports: The effect of accurate and Inaccurate information on memory and bias. Colgate University Journal of the Sciences, 34(1), 119-53.

Shaw, J.I. & Skolnick, P. (1994). Sex differences, weapon focus, and eyewitness

Reliability. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134(4), 413-20.

Technical Working Group for Eyewitness Evidence (2003). Eyewitness evidence:A

Trainer’s manual for law enforcement.National Institute of Justice. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/nij/eyewitness/188678.pdf

Turtle, J., Lindsay, R.C.L., & Wells, G.L. (n.d.). Best practice recommendations for

eyewitness evidence procedures: New ideas for the oldest way to solve a case. The Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services, 1, 5-18 Retrieved from http://www.ryerson.ca/~jturtle/cjpss.html

Vallas, G. (2011). A survey of federal and state standards for the admission of expert Testimony on the reliability of eyewitnesses. American Journal of Criminal Law, 39(1), 97-146.

Vollen, L. & Eggers, D. (2005). Surviving justice: America’s wrongfully convicted and Exonerated. San Francisco, CA: McSweeney’s Books.

Wells, G. L. & Olson, E. A. (2003). Eyewitness testimony. Annual Review of

Psychology, 54(1), 277-95.

Wells, G. L. & Quinlivan, D. S. (2009). Suggestive eyewitness identification

Procedures and the Supreme Court’s reliability test in light of eyewitness science: 30 years later. Law and Human Behavior,33(1), 1-24. doi: 10.1007/s10979-008-9130-3

Wixted, J. T. (2007). Dual-process theory and signal-detection

Theory of recognition memory. Psychological Review, 114, 152-176.Wonsowicz, P. (2012). Evidence: A context and practice casebook. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

44 S. C. L. Rev. 115 (1992-1993) 44(1). Evidence. Expert testimony about eyewitness Reliability held admissible.