Confidence and accuracy of lineup selections and rejections: Postdicting rejection accuracy with confidence

R.C.L. Lindsay; N. Kalmet; J. Leung; M.I. Bertrand; J.D. Sauer; M. Sauerland

doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002

Confidence and accuracy of lineup selections and rejections: Postdicting rejection accuracy with confidence

R.C.L. Lindsay^*, N. Kalmet, J. Leung, M.I. Bertrand, J.D. Sauer, M. Sauerland

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

74 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Correlation and calibration approaches show meaningful, positive confidence-accuracy relations for witnesses making selections from lineups, but rarely for rejections (Brewer & Wells, 2006; Sauerland & Sporer, 2009). This disparity may reflect the difference between selecting a single photo versus rejecting a set of photos. Participants (N = 101) in two experiments made selections from and rejections of lineups in situations requiring either a single confidence rating about a single face (typical of "choosers") or a single confidence rating about multiple faces (typical of "nonchoosers"). Mean confidence ratings were significantly higher for accurate versus inaccurate decisions for both selections and rejections when decisions were based on single faces. Single decisions about multiple faces produced no significant difference in confidence between correct and incorrect rejections but a significant difference for selections.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	179-184
Number of pages	6
Journal	Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Volume	2
Issue number	3
Early online date	28 Jun 2013
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002
Publication status	Published - Sept 2013

Keywords

Choosing
Confidence-accuracy
Eyewitness identification
Rejection
Showup

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002

Full textFinal published version, 333 KBLicence: Taverne

Cite this

@article{d0581e6623424c7ab2f5ff7a80c14dc3,

title = "Confidence and accuracy of lineup selections and rejections: Postdicting rejection accuracy with confidence",

abstract = "Correlation and calibration approaches show meaningful, positive confidence-accuracy relations for witnesses making selections from lineups, but rarely for rejections (Brewer & Wells, 2006; Sauerland & Sporer, 2009). This disparity may reflect the difference between selecting a single photo versus rejecting a set of photos. Participants (N = 101) in two experiments made selections from and rejections of lineups in situations requiring either a single confidence rating about a single face (typical of {"}choosers{"}) or a single confidence rating about multiple faces (typical of {"}nonchoosers{"}). Mean confidence ratings were significantly higher for accurate versus inaccurate decisions for both selections and rejections when decisions were based on single faces. Single decisions about multiple faces produced no significant difference in confidence between correct and incorrect rejections but a significant difference for selections. ",

keywords = "Choosing, Confidence-accuracy, Eyewitness identification, Rejection, Showup",

author = "R.C.L. Lindsay and N. Kalmet and J. Leung and M.I. Bertrand and J.D. Sauer and M. Sauerland",

year = "2013",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002",

language = "English",

volume = "2",

pages = "179--184",

journal = "Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition",

issn = "2211-3681",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Confidence and accuracy of lineup selections and rejections: Postdicting rejection accuracy with confidence

AU - Lindsay, R.C.L.

AU - Kalmet, N.

AU - Leung, J.

AU - Bertrand, M.I.

AU - Sauer, J.D.

AU - Sauerland, M.

PY - 2013/9

Y1 - 2013/9

N2 - Correlation and calibration approaches show meaningful, positive confidence-accuracy relations for witnesses making selections from lineups, but rarely for rejections (Brewer & Wells, 2006; Sauerland & Sporer, 2009). This disparity may reflect the difference between selecting a single photo versus rejecting a set of photos. Participants (N = 101) in two experiments made selections from and rejections of lineups in situations requiring either a single confidence rating about a single face (typical of "choosers") or a single confidence rating about multiple faces (typical of "nonchoosers"). Mean confidence ratings were significantly higher for accurate versus inaccurate decisions for both selections and rejections when decisions were based on single faces. Single decisions about multiple faces produced no significant difference in confidence between correct and incorrect rejections but a significant difference for selections.

AB - Correlation and calibration approaches show meaningful, positive confidence-accuracy relations for witnesses making selections from lineups, but rarely for rejections (Brewer & Wells, 2006; Sauerland & Sporer, 2009). This disparity may reflect the difference between selecting a single photo versus rejecting a set of photos. Participants (N = 101) in two experiments made selections from and rejections of lineups in situations requiring either a single confidence rating about a single face (typical of "choosers") or a single confidence rating about multiple faces (typical of "nonchoosers"). Mean confidence ratings were significantly higher for accurate versus inaccurate decisions for both selections and rejections when decisions were based on single faces. Single decisions about multiple faces produced no significant difference in confidence between correct and incorrect rejections but a significant difference for selections.

KW - Choosing

KW - Confidence-accuracy

KW - Eyewitness identification

KW - Rejection

KW - Showup

U2 - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.06.002

M3 - Article

SN - 2211-3681

VL - 2

SP - 179

EP - 184

JO - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

IS - 3

ER -