181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33444064)
1. Impact of disguise on identification decisions and confidence with simultaneous and sequential lineups.
Mansour JK; Beaudry JL; Bertrand MI; Kalmet N; Melsom EI; Lindsay RCL
Law Hum Behav; 2020 Dec; 44(6):502-515. PubMed ID: 33444064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of disguise on identification decisions and confidence with simultaneous and sequential lineups.
Mansour JK; Beaudry JL; Bertrand MI; Kalmet N; Melsom EI; Lindsay RC
Law Hum Behav; 2012 Dec; 36(6):513-26. PubMed ID: 22353048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Retraction of Mansour et al. (2012).
Law Hum Behav; 2020 Dec; 44(6):515. PubMed ID: 33444065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mistaken eyewitness identification rates increase when either witnessing or testing conditions get worse.
Smith AM; Wilford MM; Quigley-McBride A; Wells GL
Law Hum Behav; 2019 Aug; 43(4):358-368. PubMed ID: 31144829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Do masked-face lineups facilitate eyewitness identification of a masked individual?
Manley KD; Chan JCK; Wells GL
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2019 Sep; 25(3):396-409. PubMed ID: 30556719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Pre-identification confidence is related to eyewitness lineup identification accuracy across heterogeneous encoding conditions.
Molinaro PF; Charman SD; Wylie K
Law Hum Behav; 2021 Dec; 45(6):524-541. PubMed ID: 34661424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Measuring lineup fairness from eyewitness identification data using a multinomial processing tree model.
Menne NM; Winter K; Bell R; Buchner A
Sci Rep; 2023 Apr; 13(1):6290. PubMed ID: 37072473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparing witness performance in the field versus the lab: How real-world conditions affect eyewitness decision-making.
Eisen ML; Ying RC; Chui C; Swaby MA
Law Hum Behav; 2022 Jun; 46(3):175-188. PubMed ID: 35604705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Memory strength and lineup presentation moderate effects of administrator influence on mistaken identifications.
Zimmerman DM; Chorn JA; Rhead LM; Evelo AJ; Kovera MB
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2017 Dec; 23(4):460-473. PubMed ID: 29265857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. "Only your first yes will count": The impact of prelineup instructions on sequential lineup decisions.
Horry R; Fitzgerald RJ; Mansour JK
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2021 Mar; 27(1):170-186. PubMed ID: 33119367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Are multiple-trial experiments appropriate for eyewitness identification studies? Accuracy, choosing, and confidence across trials.
Mansour JK; Beaudry JL; Lindsay RCL
Behav Res Methods; 2017 Dec; 49(6):2235-2254. PubMed ID: 28432569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Using machine learning analyses to explore relations between eyewitness lineup looking behaviors and suspect guilt.
Price HL; Bruer KC; Adkins MC
Law Hum Behav; 2020 Jun; 44(3):223-237. PubMed ID: 32105097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Active exploration of faces in police lineups increases discrimination accuracy.
Colloff MF; Flowe HD; Smith HMJ; Seale-Carlisle TM; Meissner CA; Rockey JC; Pande B; Kujur P; Parveen N; Chandel P; Singh MM; Pradhan S; Parganiha A
Am Psychol; 2022; 77(2):196-220. PubMed ID: 34793182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Designing police lineups to maximize memory performance.
Seale-Carlisle TM; Wetmore SA; Flowe HD; Mickes L
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2019 Sep; 25(3):410-430. PubMed ID: 31094561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Eyewitness confidence in simultaneous and sequential lineups: a criterion shift account for sequential mistaken identification overconfidence.
Dobolyi DG; Dodson CS
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2013 Dec; 19(4):345-57. PubMed ID: 24188335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Eyewitness accuracy rates in sequential and simultaneous lineup presentations: a meta-analytic comparison.
Steblay N; Dysart J; Fulero S; Lindsay RC
Law Hum Behav; 2001 Oct; 25(5):459-73. PubMed ID: 11688368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Testing a potential alternative to traditional identification procedures: Reaction time-based concealed information test does not work for lineups with cooperative witnesses.
Sauerland M; Wolfs ACF; Crans S; Verschuere B
Psychol Res; 2019 Sep; 83(6):1210-1222. PubMed ID: 29181584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Why are lineups better than showups? A test of the filler siphoning and enhanced discriminability accounts.
Colloff MF; Wixted JT
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2020 Mar; 26(1):124-143. PubMed ID: 30883151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Enhancing lineup identification accuracy: two codes are better than one.
Melara RD; DeWitt-Rickards TS; O'Brien TP
J Appl Psychol; 1989 Oct; 74(5):706-13. PubMed ID: 2793771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
