Neuschatz Jeffrey S, Lawson Deah S, Fairless Andrew H, Powers Ráchael A, Neuschatz Joseph S, Goodsell Charles A, Toglia Michael P
The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA.
Law Hum Behav. 2007 Jun;31(3):231-47. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9047-7. Epub 2007 Jan 26.
Three studies examined procedures for reducing the post-identification feedback effect. After viewing a video event, participants were then asked to identify a suspect from a target-absent photo lineup. After making their identification, some participants were given information suggesting that their identification was correct, while others were given no information about the accuracy of their identification. Some participants who received confirming feedback were also given reasons to entertain suspicion regarding the motives of the lineup administrator, either immediately (Experiment 1) or after a one-week retention interval (Experiment 2). Suspicious perceivers failed to demonstrate the confidence inflation effects typically associated with confirming post-identification feedback. In Experiment 3, the confidence prophylactic effect was tested both immediately and after a one-week retention interval. The effect of confidence prophylactic varied with retention interval such that it eliminated the effects of post-identification feedback immediately but not after a retention interval. However, the suspicion manipulation eliminated the post-identification feedback effects at both time intervals. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
三项研究考察了减少身份识别后反馈效应的程序。观看视频事件后,参与者被要求从没有目标人物的照片列队中指认一名嫌疑人。做出指认后,一些参与者会得到表明其指认正确的信息,而另一些参与者则未得到关于其指认准确性的任何信息。一些收到确认反馈的参与者还被给予理由对列队管理员的动机产生怀疑,要么立即(实验1),要么在一周的保留期后(实验2)。持怀疑态度的感知者未能表现出通常与确认身份识别后反馈相关的信心膨胀效应。在实验3中,立即和在一周保留期后都对信心预防效应进行了测试。信心预防效应随保留期而变化,即它能立即消除身份识别后反馈的影响,但在保留期后则不能。然而,怀疑操纵在两个时间间隔都消除了身份识别后反馈效应。文中讨论了理论和实践意义。