Citation

McAllister HA, Michel LLM, Tarcza EV, Fitzmorris JM, Nguyen KHT. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2008; 22(2): 193-206.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/acp.1370

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to replicate and to extend past findings that the best procedure for presenting lineup pictures is not the best procedure for presenting mug book pictures. Participants witnessed a videotape of a simulated crime that was followed by a lineup task for half the participants or a mug book task for the other half. The task factor was crossed with two other factors: (a) a presentation procedure factor--pictures presented one-at-a-time or grouped 12 per page and (b) a presence of the perpetrator factor--perpetrator present or absent in the viewed pictures. For perpetrator-absent conditions, the one-at-a time lineup procedure produced more correct rejections than the grouped lineup procedure replicating past results; however, for the mug book task the two presentation procedures did not differ. For perpetrator-present conditions, the grouped presentation procedure produced more correct identifications than the one-at-a time procedure in both lineups and mug books. The different pattern of results for lineups and mug books was explained in terms of differences in response criterion. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Language: en