@article{ref1,
title="How Should Witnesses Regulate the Accuracy of Their Identification Decisions: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back?",
journal="Journal of experimental psychology: learning, memory, and cognition",
year="2012",
author="Perfect, Timothy J. and Weber, Nathan",
volume="38",
number="6",
pages="1810-1818",
abstract="Explorations of memory accuracy control normally contrast forced-report with free-report performance across a set of items and show a trade-off between memory quantity and accuracy. However, this memory control framework has not been tested with lineup identifications that may involve rejection of all alternatives. A large-scale (N = 439) lineup study explored regulation of identification decisions either with an initial forced-choice decision followed by free-report decision or with the reverse. Overall, initial free-report decisions provided stronger evidence of suspect guilt than forced-choice decisions, with little cost to memory quantity. The 2 response orders produced different patterns of response associated with control of accuracy. A model based on evaluation of the strength of the best candidate answer was able to provide only a partial fit to the data, suggesting that witnesses use more than simple memory strength of a candidate answer when controlling the accuracy of their responses in free report. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0278-7393",
doi="10.1037/a0028461",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028461"
}