Eyewitness metamemory predicts identification performance in biased and unbiased line-ups
PURPOSE-Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate identifications is a challenging issue in the criminal justice system, especially for biased police line-ups. That is because biased line-ups undermine the diagnostic value of accuracy post-dictors such as confidence and decision time. Here, we aimed t...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Otros Autores: | ; ; ; ; |
Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
Lenguaje: | Inglés |
Publicado: |
2020
|
En: |
Legal and criminological psychology
Año: 2020, Volumen: 25, Número: 2, Páginas: 111-132 |
Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Rights Information: | CC BY 4.0 |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
Palabras clave: |
Sumario: | PURPOSE-Distinguishing accurate from inaccurate identifications is a challenging issue in the criminal justice system, especially for biased police line-ups. That is because biased line-ups undermine the diagnostic value of accuracy post-dictors such as confidence and decision time. Here, we aimed to test general and eyewitness-specific self-ratings of memory capacity as potential estimators of identification performance that are unaffected by line-up bias.METHODS-Participants (N = 744) completed a metamemory assessment consisting of the Multifactorial Metamemory Questionnaire and the Eyewitness Metamemory Scale and took part in a standard eyewitness paradigm. Following the presentation of a mock-crime video, they viewed either biased or unbiased line-ups.RESULTS-Self-ratings of discontentment with eyewitness memory ability were indicative of identification accuracy for both biased and unbiased line-ups. Participants who scored low on eyewitness metamemory factors also displayed a stronger confidence–accuracy calibration than those who scored high.CONCLUSIONS-These results suggest a promising role for self-ratings of memory capacity in the evaluation of eyewitness identifications, while also advancing theory on self-assessments for different memory systems. |
---|---|
Notas: | Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 128-132 gesehen am 20.01.2023 First published: 3 February 2020 |
ISSN: | 2044-8333 |
DOI: | 10.1111/lcrp.12166 |