Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKalmet, Natalie
dc.contributor.otherQueen's University (Kingston, Ont.). Theses (Queen's University (Kingston, Ont.))en
dc.date2009-10-01 16:22:03.154en
dc.date.accessioned2009-10-06T20:37:00Z
dc.date.available2009-10-06T20:37:00Z
dc.date.issued2009-10-06T20:37:00Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1974/5262
dc.descriptionThesis (Master, Psychology) -- Queen's University, 2009-10-01 16:22:03.154en
dc.description.abstractPryke, Lindsay, Dysart, and Dupuis (2004) investigated a novel method of lineup administration where participants made identifications from multiple lineups showing faces and bodies or playing recorded voices. Identifications from these multiple lineups was diagnostic of guilt; that is, the more lineups a person was selected from the more likely it was that the selected person was actually seen by the witness (as opposed to an innocent suspect; Pryke et al., 2004). The current studies expanded on this procedure and assessed how well the multiple lineup method works when each of the lineups for a target show faces of the same lineup members, with each lineup showing the members facing one of three angles. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 72) saw the targets in the same three views that were shown in the lineups and were asked to make lineup decisions for each of the three lineups. In Experiment 2, participants (n = 96) saw the targets in only one view, which did not always match the views seen in the lineups. Again, participants made lineup decisions for each of the three lineups. For both studies, when the data were collapsed across targets, the procedure was diagnostic in that more selections were associated with a higher probability of guilt (operationalized as being the previously seen target). However, the effectiveness of the procedure varied across targets such that in some cases multiple selections were no more diagnostic of guilt than single selections. Pryke et al., (2004) reported that multiple identifications were highly diagnostic of guilt but relatively rare. In the current studies, most participants made multiple identifications of the targets, probably because all of the lineups used photos of faces. Results for assessments of confidence-accuracy and advantages for certain lineup angles were generally mixed and often differed between the two studies. In all, the most pertinent assessments of utility (diagnosticity and percentage of participants making multiple identifications) showed promise for using multiple lineups of faces.en
dc.format.extent807166 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageenen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCanadian thesesen
dc.rightsThis publication is made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws without written authority from the copyright owner.en
dc.subjectLineupsen
dc.subjectMultiple identificationsen
dc.titleMultiple Lineup Identification Procedure: Utility with Face-Only Lineupsen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.description.degreeMasteren
dc.contributor.supervisorLindsay, Roderick C. L.en
dc.contributor.departmentPsychologyen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record