Ecological parameters do not equal nonlineup evidence: a reply to Wells and Luus

Article Abstract:

The contribution of a lineup identification is in the information it provides about suspect-perpetrator resemblance on top of all other evidence. To assess the diagnostic impact of that contribution, one needs to know the likelihood that an innocent suspect just happens to match the perpetrator in appearance in the way and to the extent inferred from lineup data. Calculating that likelihood calls for statistics about the relative frequency of such a match in the ecology. Therefore, ecological parameters ought to be considered for lineup data just as for other sorts of evidence. Such parameters do not in themselves constitute evidence, but rather serve to estimate diagnosticity of evidence. The index advocated by Wells and Luus (1990) is actually just a measure of lineup reliability. A way to incorporate reliability in the calculation of diagnosticity is presented. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Psychology, Forensic, Forensic psychology

---

The diagnosticity of a lineup should not be confused with the diagnostic value of nonlineup evidence

Article Abstract:

We argue that a lineup is diagnostic to the extent that it reveals information from recognition memory that was not available from the eyewitness's recall memory. Accordingly, lineup diagnosticity is defined as the probability that an innocent suspect is identified by the witness when lineup members resemble the eyewitness's prelineup description. Navon (1990) argued that this definition underestimates lineup diagnosticity because it ignores other evidence against the accused. We argue that these other forms of evidence, which Navon calls ecological parameters, have diagnostic utility but should not be confused with the diagnostic value of the lineup itself. Furthermore, although Navon correctly noted that experimenters' selections of innocent suspects in eyewitness experiments are not random, we argue that police select suspects in a similarly nonrandom manner. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Memory

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Location and network effects on innovation success: evidence for UK, German and Irish manufacturing plants. The dynamics of technological innovation: the case of the pharmaceutical industry
• Abstracts: Structural equations modeling test of a turnover theory: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Interviewer predictions of applicant qualifications and interviewer validity: aggregate and individual analyses
• Abstracts: Nature and consequences of halo error: a critical analysis. A meta-analysis of interrater and internal consistency reliability of selection interviews

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.