|
Topic |
Study |
Details |
Evaluation |
Application |
|
Recognising and identifying faces |
Goldstein
and Chance (1971) |
Women’s
faces snowflakes and ink blots. |
|
|
|
|
Patterson
and Baddeley (1977) |
Change
in appearance |
|
|
|
|
Ainsworth
(1995) |
Good
Samaritan picked |
|
|
|
|
Shepherd,
Davies and Ellis (1978) |
Labelling |
|
|
|
Photospread identifications |
General |
Live
perpetrator and static photo |
|
|
|
|
|
Ecological
validity of experiments |
|
|
|
|
|
Perpetrator
not present and witness feels under pressure to choose. |
|
|
|
Line ups |
Wells et al (1994) |
Minimum
number of foils |
|
|
|
|
Brigham
and Pfeiffer (1994) |
Functional
size |
|
|
|
|
General |
Foils
different from suspect |
|
Suspect
should not stand out (Wells et al 1993) |
|
|
|
Behaviour
of suspect |
|
Make
them feel at ease (Wells et al 1999) |
|
|
Cutler
& Penrod (1988) |
Sequential
line up rather than whole array |
|
|
|
Improving Identity parades |
|
|
|
Dress
all in similar clothes but not the clothes similar to those worn at scene of
crime |
|
|
Cutler
& Penrod (1988) |
|
|
Include
voice, three-quarters profile and walk |
|
|
Wells
and Bradfield (1998) |
|
|
Do
not give feedback as confidence increases |
|
Cross-race identification |
Duncan
(1976) |
White
or Black Assailant or Victim |
|
|
|
|
Chance
and Goldstein (1996) |
Difficulty
in identifying across race |
|
|