Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, United States.
Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, United States.
Cognition. 2024 Oct;251:105877. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105877. Epub 2024 Jul 14.
When presented with a lineup, the witness is tasked with identifying the culprit or indicating that the culprit is not present. The witness then qualifies the decision with a confidence judgment. But how do witnesses go about making these decisions and judgments? According to absolute-judgment models, witnesses determine which lineup member provides the strongest match to memory and base their identification decision and confidence judgment on the absolute strength of this MAX lineup member. Conversely, relative-judgment models propose that witnesses determine which lineup member provides the strongest match to memory and then base their identification decision and confidence judgment on the relative strength of the MAX lineup member compared to the remaining lineup members. We took a critical test approach to test the predictions of both models. As predicted by the absolute-judgment model, but contrary to the predictions of the relative-judgment model, witnesses were more likely to correctly reject low-similarity lineups than high-similarity lineups (Experiment 1), and more likely to reject biased lineups than fair lineups (Experiment 2). Likewise, witnesses rejected low-similarity lineups with greater confidence than high-similarity lineups (Experiment 1) and rejected biased lineups with greater confidence than fair lineups (Experiment 2). Only a single pattern was consistent with the relative model and inconsistent with the absolute model: suspect identifications from biased lineups were made with greater confidence than suspect identifications from fair lineups (Experiment 2). The results suggest that absolute-judgment models better predict witness decision-making than do relative-judgment models and that pure relative-judgment models are unviable.
当呈现出一个辨认组时，证人的任务是识别罪犯或表明罪犯不在其中。证人随后会根据信心判断来对该决定进行定性。但是，证人如何做出这些决定和判断呢？根据绝对判断模型，证人会确定哪个辨认组成员与记忆提供最强的匹配，并根据这个 MAX 辨认组成员的绝对强度来做出他们的辨认决定和信心判断。相反，相对判断模型则提出，证人会确定哪个辨认组成员与记忆提供最强的匹配，然后根据 MAX 辨认组成员相对于其余辨认组成员的相对强度来做出他们的辨认决定和信心判断。我们采取了批判性测试方法来检验这两种模型的预测。与绝对判断模型的预测一致，但与相对判断模型的预测相反，证人更有可能正确拒绝低相似度的辨认组，而不是高相似度的辨认组（实验 1），并且更有可能拒绝有偏差的辨认组，而不是公平的辨认组（实验 2）。同样，证人对低相似度辨认组的拒绝更有信心，而不是高相似度辨认组（实验 1），并且对有偏差的辨认组的拒绝更有信心，而不是公平的辨认组（实验 2）。只有一种模式与相对模型一致，与绝对模型不一致：有偏差的辨认组中的嫌疑人识别比公平的辨认组中的嫌疑人识别更有信心（实验 2）。结果表明，绝对判断模型比相对判断模型更能预测证人的决策，而纯粹的相对判断模型是不可行的。
