We had participants view a crime video, and then they attempted to identify the perpetrator from a simultaneous or sequential lineup. Therefore, we compared configural processing in simultaneous and sequential lineups to examine whether there are differences. Recent research has found that face discrimination accuracy in lineups is better in a simultaneous compared to a sequential lineup procedure. We tested, using the inversion paradigm, the role of configural processing in lineups.
#LEND ME YOUR EARS SPEAKER SERIES#
The Article concludes with a series of recommendations, including less suggestive identification techniques, the limited use of experts, a more sophisticated approach to assessing reliability, and the use of informative jury instructions.Ĭonfigural processing supports accurate face recognition, yet it has never been examined within the context of criminal identification lineups. However, this Article does not support the admission of voiceprint analysis to identify speakers, despite some recent appellate decisions that have accepted this approach. Additional research shows that experts in phonetics are more accurate in identifying speakers than are lay people, suggesting that experts may play some role in the process. While the doctrine concerns itself with reliability, many of the factors that make voice identifications either more or less reliable are not considered in the case law. This Article examines the law governing both lay and expert identification of speakers, and evaluates existing doctrine in light of a great deal of basic research into how accurate people are at identifying an individual by his voice. The reluctance of the legal system to deal with this problem stems from a confluence of ignorance, rigid adherence to historical positions that are no longer tenable, and some interesting judicial missteps concerning the accuracy of "voiceprints" that have made courts unreceptive to voice identification research. Yet while the reliability of eyewitness identification has been a focal point in the news, scholarly literature, and the courts, the reliability of earwitness identification has gone virtually unnoticed in the case law and legal literature. The amount of exposure, the nature of the identification process, and the number of exposures all matter in determining how likely a witness is to make a correct identification. Many of the problems that people have identifying speakers solely by their voices are similar to those that people have as eyewitnesses.
0 kommentar(er)
