The effect of lineup size on discriminability is dependent on filler similarity and independent of encoding strength.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.3758/s13421-024-01649-x
Allan L Lam, John T Wixted
{"title":"The effect of lineup size on discriminability is dependent on filler similarity and independent of encoding strength.","authors":"Allan L Lam, John T Wixted","doi":"10.3758/s13421-024-01649-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A photo lineup, which consists of one suspect and several physically similar fillers, is often used by the police to test an eyewitness's memory. To optimize memory performance, how similar should the fillers be to the suspect, and how many fillers should be included in the lineup? Recent work suggests that using fillers who match the basic characteristics of the perpetrator (e.g., same age, race, and gender) but who are otherwise maximally dissimilar to the suspect optimizes discriminability. However, the optimal lineup size has been found to vary with filler similarity, with larger lineup sizes increasing or decreasing discriminability depending on whether low-similarity or high-similarity fillers were used, respectively. Because manipulating filler similarity at retrieval affects overall performance, here we investigated whether encoding manipulations that affect overall performance also affect how lineup size influences discriminability. In three experiments, we first replicated prior findings (N = 502), then reduced encoding strength by making study images blurry when low-similarity fillers were used (N = 553), and finally increased encoding strength by repeating study images when high-similarity fillers were used (N = 501). We found that whether overall performance was low or high due these encoding manipulations, discriminability still increased as a function of lineup size when low-similarity fillers were used and decreased as a function of lineup size when high-similarity fillers were used. Thus, lineup size has opposing effects on discriminability when task difficulty is manipulated at retrieval, which narrows the theoretical explanations for why that effect is observed.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01649-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A photo lineup, which consists of one suspect and several physically similar fillers, is often used by the police to test an eyewitness's memory. To optimize memory performance, how similar should the fillers be to the suspect, and how many fillers should be included in the lineup? Recent work suggests that using fillers who match the basic characteristics of the perpetrator (e.g., same age, race, and gender) but who are otherwise maximally dissimilar to the suspect optimizes discriminability. However, the optimal lineup size has been found to vary with filler similarity, with larger lineup sizes increasing or decreasing discriminability depending on whether low-similarity or high-similarity fillers were used, respectively. Because manipulating filler similarity at retrieval affects overall performance, here we investigated whether encoding manipulations that affect overall performance also affect how lineup size influences discriminability. In three experiments, we first replicated prior findings (N = 502), then reduced encoding strength by making study images blurry when low-similarity fillers were used (N = 553), and finally increased encoding strength by repeating study images when high-similarity fillers were used (N = 501). We found that whether overall performance was low or high due these encoding manipulations, discriminability still increased as a function of lineup size when low-similarity fillers were used and decreased as a function of lineup size when high-similarity fillers were used. Thus, lineup size has opposing effects on discriminability when task difficulty is manipulated at retrieval, which narrows the theoretical explanations for why that effect is observed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
队列大小对可辨别性的影响取决于填充物的相似性,而与编码强度无关。
警方经常使用由一名嫌疑人和几名体貌相似的填充物组成的列队照片来测试目击者的记忆力。为了优化记忆效果,填充物应与嫌疑人有多相似,以及在列队中应包括多少填充物?最近的研究表明,使用与犯罪者基本特征相符(如相同的年龄、种族和性别)但在其他方面与犯罪嫌疑人最大程度不同的填充者可以优化辨别能力。然而,研究发现,最佳列队规模随填充物相似度的变化而变化,根据使用低相似度填充物还是高相似度填充物,较大的列队规模会分别提高或降低可辨别性。由于在检索时对填充物相似性的操作会影响整体表现,因此我们在此研究了影响整体表现的编码操作是否也会影响排列大小对可辨别性的影响。在三个实验中,我们首先复制了之前的研究结果(N = 502),然后在使用低相似度填充物时通过使研究图像模糊来降低编码强度(N = 553),最后在使用高相似度填充物时通过重复研究图像来提高编码强度(N = 501)。我们发现,无论这些编码操作导致的整体表现是低还是高,当使用低相似度填充物时,可辨别性仍然会随着队列大小的增加而增加,而当使用高相似度填充物时,可辨别性则会随着队列大小的增加而降低。因此,当在检索时操纵任务难度时,阵容大小对可辨别性的影响是相反的,这就缩小了对为什么会观察到这种效应的理论解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1