Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLindsay, D. Stephen
dc.contributor.authorNilsen, Elizabeth S.
dc.contributor.authorRead, J. Don
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-05 14:49:23 (GMT)
dc.date.available2021-11-05 14:49:23 (GMT)
dc.date.issued2000-06
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005504320565
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/17689
dc.description©American Psychological Association, [2000]. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: [https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1023/A:1005504320565]en
dc.description.abstractUndergraduate participants were tested in 144 pairs, with one member of each pair randomly assigned to a “witness” role and the other to an “:investigator” role. Each witness viewed a target person on video under good or poor witnessing conditions and was then interviewed by an investigator, who administered a photo lineup and rated his or her confidence in the witness. Witnesses also (separately) rated their own confidence. Investigators discriminated between accurate and inaccurate witnesses, but did so less well than witnesses' own confidence ratings and were biased toward accepting witnesses' decisions. Moreover, investigators' confidence made no unique contribution to the prediction of witnesses' accuracy. Witnesses' confidence and accuracy were affected in the same direction by witnessing conditions, and there was a substantial confidence–accuracy correlation when data were collapsed across witnessing conditions. Confidence can be strongly indicative of accuracy when witnessing conditions vary widely, and witnesses' confidence may be a better indicator than investigators'en
dc.description.sponsorshipFunder 1,This research was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada grant to the first author || Funder 2, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada grant to the third author.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherAPAen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesLaw and Human Behavior;
dc.subjectSocial Psychologyen
dc.subjectIdentification Decisionen
dc.subjectUnique Contributionen
dc.subjectConfidence Ratingen
dc.subjectTarget Personen
dc.titleWitnessing-condition Heterogeneity and Witnesses’ Versus Investigators’ Confidence in the Accuracy of Witnesses’ Identification Decisionsen
dc.typeArticleen
dcterms.bibliographicCitationLindsay, D. S., Nilsen, E., & Read, J. D. (2000). Witnessing-condition heterogeneity and witnesses' versus investigators' confidence in the accuracy of witnesses' identification decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 24(6), 685–697. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005504320565en
uws.contributor.affiliation1Faculty of Artsen
uws.contributor.affiliation2Psychologyen
uws.typeOfResourceTexten
uws.peerReviewStatusRevieweden
uws.scholarLevelFacultyen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


UWSpace

University of Waterloo Library
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
519 888 4883

All items in UWSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

DSpace software

Service outages