These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
3. The selective cue integration framework: a theory of postidentification witness confidence assessment. Charman SD; Carlucci M; Vallano J; Gregory AH J Exp Psychol Appl; 2010 Jun; 16(2):204-18. PubMed ID: 20565204 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Blind sequential lineup administration reduces both false identifications and confidence in those false identifications. Charman SD; Quiroz V Law Hum Behav; 2016 Oct; 40(5):477-87. PubMed ID: 27227276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effect of post-identification feedback, delay, and suspicion on accurate eyewitnesses. Quinlivan DS; Neuschatz JS; Douglass AB; Wells GL; Wetmore SA Law Hum Behav; 2012 Jun; 36(3):206-14. PubMed ID: 22667810 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of postidentification feedback on eyewitness identification and nonidentification confidence. Semmler C; Brewer N; Wells GL J Appl Psychol; 2004 Apr; 89(2):334-46. PubMed ID: 15065979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Lineup administrator influences on eyewitness identification decisions. Clark SE; Marshall TE; Rosenthal R J Exp Psychol Appl; 2009 Mar; 15(1):63-75. PubMed ID: 19309217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Confirming feedback following a mistaken identification impairs memory for the culprit. Smalarz L; Wells GL Law Hum Behav; 2014 Jun; 38(3):283-92. PubMed ID: 24707912 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Double-blind photo lineups using actual eyewitnesses: an experimental test of a sequential versus simultaneous lineup procedure. Wells GL; Steblay NK; Dysart JE Law Hum Behav; 2015 Feb; 39(1):1-14. PubMed ID: 24933175 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Administrator blindness affects the recording of eyewitness lineup outcomes. Rodriguez DN; Berry MA Law Hum Behav; 2020 Feb; 44(1):71-87. PubMed ID: 31535891 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lineup administrators' expectations: their impact on eyewitness confidence. Garrioch L; Brimacombe CA Law Hum Behav; 2001 Jun; 25(3):299-315. PubMed ID: 11480805 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Instruction bias and lineup presentation moderate the effects of administrator knowledge on eyewitness identification. Greathouse SM; Kovera MB Law Hum Behav; 2009 Feb; 33(1):70-82. PubMed ID: 18594956 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Post-identification feedback to eyewitnesses impairs evaluators' abilities to discriminate between accurate and mistaken testimony. Smalarz L; Wells GL Law Hum Behav; 2014 Apr; 38(2):194-202. PubMed ID: 24341835 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Can eyewitnesses correct for external influences on their lineup identifications? The actual/counterfactual assessment paradigm. Charman SD; Wells GL J Exp Psychol Appl; 2008 Mar; 14(1):5-20. PubMed ID: 18377163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The damaging effect of confirming feedback on the relation between eyewitness certainty and identification accuracy. Bradfield AL; Wells GL; Olson EA J Appl Psychol; 2002 Feb; 87(1):112-20. PubMed ID: 11916205 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]