Most eyewitness identification is based on observation that occurs under restric

Question

Most eyewitness identification is based on observation that occurs under restricted conditions (for example, poor lighting, distance, extreme stress, or brief exposure). How accurate are these identifications and how are they influenced by these limitations? A recent study examined the influence of distance on the accuracy of face recognition (Lampinen, Erickson, Moore, & Hittson, 2014). Each participant viewed eight living targets, one at a time, outside on a flat sidewalk during daytime hours at a randomly selected distance of either 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, or 40 yards. After the participant was asked to turn around, a target individual was positioned at the assigned distance. The participant then turned back and looked for 10 seconds before being asked to turn around again. The target individual was then replaced by a new target. This procedure was repeated until all eight targets had been seen. The order in which the eight targets appeared was also randomized. After viewing all eight targets, the participant was taken from the viewing area and asked to complete a survey. Finally, the participant was shown 16 photographs, one at a time, in a random order. Eight of the photographs showed the eight target individuals, and the other eight photographs showed novel faces that were selected so that each matched a verbal description of one of the targets. For each photograph, the participants were asked whether they had seen or not seen the individual and to rate their level of confidence The results showed that the proportion of correct identifications was around 70% at a distance of 5 yards but dropped regularly as the distance increased to around 55% at 40 yards. Clearly, distance has a significant influence on the accuracy of eyewitness identification Although the results may not be particularly surprising, this study provides a relatively simple and easy-to-understand example of experimental research strategy. The researchers manipulated the viewing distance by randomly assigning participants to one of six different distance conditions. The random assignment also helped to ensure that the participant characteristics, such as age or gender, did not differ greatly from one group to another. The location and other environmental conditions were also standardized across the different distance conditions. As a result, the researchers were justified in making a cause-and-effect conclusion: increasing the viewing distance from 5 to 40 yards causes a significant decrease in the accuracy of eyewitness identification (Reference: Lampinen, J. M., Erickson, w. B., Moore, K. N., & Hittson, A. (2014). Effects of distance on face recognition: Implications for eyewitness identification. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21(6), 1489-1494. do:10.3758/s13423-014-0641-2)

Explanation / Answer

1. The correct answer is Option 2. Distance from the target is the variable that is manipulated in the study.

2. The correct answer is Option 1. Location and other environmental conditions are controlled in the experiment.

3. The correct answer is Option 2. The confidence of researchers is justified became lighting and location are the same for all tretwment conditions.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse M
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.