Fitzgerald Ryan J, Price Heather L, Valentine Tim
Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth.
Department of Psychology, Thompson Rivers University.
Psychol Public Policy Law. 2018 Aug;24(3):307-325. doi: 10.1037/law0000164.
The medium used to present lineup members for eyewitness identification varies according to the location of the criminal investigation. Although in some jurisdictions live lineups remain the default procedure, elsewhere this practice has been replaced with photo or video lineups. This divergence leads to two possibilities: Either some jurisdictions are not using the lineup medium that best facilitates accurate eyewitness identification or the lineup medium has no bearing on the accuracy of eyewitness identification. Photo and video lineups are the more practical options, but proponents of live lineups believe witnesses make better identification decisions when the lineup members are physically present. Here, the authors argue against this live superiority hypothesis. To be superior in practice, the benefits of live presentation would have to be substantial enough to overcome the inherent difficulties of organizing and administering a live lineup. The review of the literature suggests that even in experimental settings, where these difficulties can be minimized, it is not clear that live lineups are superior. The authors conclude that live lineups are rarely the best option in practice and encourage further research to establish which nonlive medium provides the best balance between probative value and practical utility.
用于向目击者展示辨认对象的媒介会根据刑事调查的地点而有所不同。尽管在某些司法管辖区,现场列队辨认仍是默认程序,但在其他地方,这种做法已被照片或视频列队辨认所取代。这种差异导致了两种可能性:要么某些司法管辖区没有使用最有利于准确目击者辨认的列队辨认媒介,要么列队辨认媒介与目击者辨认的准确性无关。照片和视频列队辨认是更实际的选择,但现场列队辨认的支持者认为,当列队辨认对象实际在场时,目击者能做出更好的辨认决定。在此,作者反对这种现场优越性假设。要在实践中具有优越性,现场展示的好处必须足够大,以克服组织和进行现场列队辨认所固有的困难。文献综述表明,即使在实验环境中,这些困难可以最小化,但现场列队辨认是否更优越尚不清楚。作者得出结论,现场列队辨认在实践中很少是最佳选择,并鼓励进一步研究,以确定哪种非现场媒介在证明价值和实际效用之间能提供最佳平衡。