Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
Leicester De Montfort Law School, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.
Memory. 2020 Jan;28(1):2-17. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2019.1673427. Epub 2019 Oct 8.
Unfamiliar voice identification is error-prone. Whilst the investigation of system variables may indicate ways of boosting earwitness performance, this is an under-researched area. Two experiments were conducted to investigate how methods of presenting voices during a parade affect accuracy and self-rated confidence. In each experiment participants listened to a target voice, and were later asked to identify that voice from a nine-person target present or target absent parade. In Experiment 1, accuracy did not vary across parades comprising 15 or 30 s sample durations. Overall, when the target was present, participants correctly identified the target voice with 39% accuracy. However, when the target was absent, participants correctly rejected the parade 6% of the time. There was no relationship between accuracy and confidence. In Experiment 2, performance with a serial procedure, in which participants responded after hearing all nine voices, was compared with a sequential procedure, in which participants made a decision after listening to each voice. Overall accuracy was higher with the sequential procedure. These results highlight the importance of system variable research in voice identification. Different methods of presenting voices have the potential to support higher levels of accuracy than the procedure currently recommended in England and Wales.
不熟悉的声音识别容易出错。虽然调查系统变量可能会显示出提高耳证人表现的方法,但这是一个研究不足的领域。进行了两项实验,以调查在游行中呈现声音的方式如何影响准确性和自我评估的信心。在每个实验中,参与者都听了一个目标声音,然后被要求从一个由 9 个人组成的目标存在或目标不存在的游行中识别出那个声音。在实验 1 中,持续时间为 15 或 30 秒的游行中,准确性没有差异。总体而言,当目标存在时,参与者以 39%的准确率正确识别出目标声音。然而,当目标不存在时,参与者正确拒绝游行的概率为 6%。准确性和信心之间没有关系。在实验 2 中,比较了在串行程序中(参与者在听到所有九个人的声音后做出回应)和在顺序程序中(参与者在听到每个声音后做出决定)的表现。整体准确性在顺序程序中更高。这些结果强调了在声音识别中进行系统变量研究的重要性。与目前在英格兰和威尔士推荐的程序相比,呈现声音的不同方法有可能支持更高水平的准确性。