Memon, Amina; Havard, Catriona; Clifford, Brian; Gabbert, Fiona and Watt, Moray
Due to copyright restrictions, this file is not available for public download
Click here to request a copy from the OU Author.
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1080/10683160903524333|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
Advances in technology have led to a new system for gathering facial identification evidence from eyewitnesses with accompanying changes in legislation in the UK. The current paper presents the responses of 1718 real witnesses and victims who attempted an identification from a video parade in Scotland in 2008. The witnesses comprised a large subset who were classified as ‘vulnerable’ due to their age, ability or the nature of the incident. Suspect identifications averaged 44%, a figure comparable to the rate reported in other field studies conducted in the UK. The foil identification rate at 42% is higher than other field data. The paper discusses the effects of witness age, vulnerability, perceived emotional state, crime type, delay and procedural aspects of the video procedure on suspect identifications.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2011 Taylor & Francis|
|Project Funding Details:||
|Keywords:||adult witnesses; eyewitness identification accuracy; eyewitness memory; eyewitness testimony; face recognition|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Social Sciences > Psychology in the Social Sciences
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Harm and Evidence Research Collaborative (HERC)|
|Depositing User:||Catriona Havard|
|Date Deposited:||09 Nov 2011 17:28|
|Last Modified:||15 Jul 2016 13:57|
|Share this page:|