{"title":"The role of suspect development practices in eyewitness identification accuracy and racial disparities in wrongful conviction","authors":"M. B. Kovera","doi":"10.1111/sipr.12102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the three previously studied categories of variables that are related to eyewitness identification accuracy: estimator (characteristics of the witnessing conditions), system (characteristics of the identification procedure that are under the control of the criminal legal system), and reflector (variables that reflect the likely accuracy of a witness). Although eyewitness scholars frequently turn to these variables and models of memory to explain why eyewitnesses make mistakes, none of these variables provides a reasonable explanation for the large racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications, yet problematic policing practices might. The policies and practices guiding police efforts to develop suspects as well as the decisions of officers to place a suspect at risk of misidentification determine the base‐rate of innocent suspects that appear in identification procedures. Current police practices—from developing suspects based on hunches, through facial recognition technology, or by pressuring reluctant witnesses to make identifications—increase the likelihood that innocent suspects will be placed in lineups. An increase in lineups with innocent suspects increases the ratio of mistaken to correct identifications without changes in witness performance. Requirements for evidence‐based suspicion, video recording identification procedures, and prohibiting coercive interviewing techniques with reluctant witnesses are recommended for reducing the effect of unreliable suspect development methods on eyewitness evidence.","PeriodicalId":47129,"journal":{"name":"Social Issues and Policy Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Issues and Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12102","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article reviews the three previously studied categories of variables that are related to eyewitness identification accuracy: estimator (characteristics of the witnessing conditions), system (characteristics of the identification procedure that are under the control of the criminal legal system), and reflector (variables that reflect the likely accuracy of a witness). Although eyewitness scholars frequently turn to these variables and models of memory to explain why eyewitnesses make mistakes, none of these variables provides a reasonable explanation for the large racial disparities in wrongful convictions based on mistaken identifications, yet problematic policing practices might. The policies and practices guiding police efforts to develop suspects as well as the decisions of officers to place a suspect at risk of misidentification determine the base‐rate of innocent suspects that appear in identification procedures. Current police practices—from developing suspects based on hunches, through facial recognition technology, or by pressuring reluctant witnesses to make identifications—increase the likelihood that innocent suspects will be placed in lineups. An increase in lineups with innocent suspects increases the ratio of mistaken to correct identifications without changes in witness performance. Requirements for evidence‐based suspicion, video recording identification procedures, and prohibiting coercive interviewing techniques with reluctant witnesses are recommended for reducing the effect of unreliable suspect development methods on eyewitness evidence.
期刊介绍:
The mission of Social Issues and Policy Review (SIPR) is to provide state of the art and timely theoretical and empirical reviews of topics and programs of research that are directly relevant to understanding and addressing social issues and public policy.Papers will be accessible and relevant to a broad audience and will normally be based on a program of research. Works in SIPR will represent perspectives directly relevant to the psychological study of social issues and public policy. Contributions are expected to be review papers that present a strong scholarly foundation and consider how research and theory can inform social issues and policy or articulate the implication of social issues and public policy for theory and research.