Catriona Havard

Sex differences in unfamiliar face identification: Evidence from matching tasks.

Research on sex differences in face recognition has reported mixed results, on balance suggesting an advantage for female observers. However, it is not clear whether this advantage is specific to face processing or reflects a more general superiority effect in episodic memory. The current study therefore examined sex differences with a face-matching task that eliminates memory demands. Across two experiments, female but not male observers showed an own-sex advantage on match trials, in which two pictures have to be identified as the same person. This advantage was present for whole faces and when only the internal or external facial features were shown. Female observers were also more accurate in these three conditions on mismatch encounters, in which two photographs have to be identified as different people, but this reflects a more general effect that is present for male and female faces. These findings converge with claims of a female advantage in face recognition and demonstrate that this effect persists when memory demands are eliminated.

Left face matching bias: Right hemisphere dominance or scanning habits?

A large body of work report a leftward bias in face processing. However, it is not clear whether this leftward bias purely reflects the dominance of the right hemisphere or is influenced by scanning habits developed by reading directions. Here, we report two experiments examining how well native readers of right to left Arabic scripts (Egyptians) could match (for identity) a target face that appeared with a companion to a line-up of 10 faces. There was a significant advantage for matching faces that appeared on the left. However, Experiment 2 found that the magnitude of this left face matching bias was almost three times weaker than the magnitude of the leftward bias shown by native readers of left to right English scripts (British). Accordingly, we suggest that the right hemisphere dominance for face processing underlies the leftward face perception bias, but with the interaction of scanning habits.

A field evaluation of the VIPER system: a new technique for eliciting eyewitness identification evidence

Advances in technology have led to a new system for gathering facial identification evidence from eyewitnesses with accompanying changes in legislation in the UK. The current paper presents the responses of 1718 real witnesses and victims who attempted an identification from a video parade in Scotland in 2008. The witnesses comprised a large subset who were classified as ‘vulnerable’ due to their age, ability or the nature of the incident. Suspect identifications averaged 44%, a figure comparable to the rate reported in other field studies conducted in the UK. The foil identification rate at 42% is higher than other field data. The paper discusses the effects of witness age, vulnerability, perceived emotional state, crime type, delay and procedural aspects of the video procedure on suspect identifications.

The influence of face age on identification from a video line-up: A comparison between older and younger adults

A group of young-adult (aged 18–35 years) and older-adult witnesses (aged 61–83 years) viewed films of two similar staged thefts, one that depicted a young culprit and the other an older culprit. After a short delay of 40–60 minutes participants were presented with two separate video line-ups, one for each target. In one line-up the target was present (TP) and the other the target was absent (TA). Older adults performed more poorly in target present and absent line-ups, and showed no own-age bias, however young adults showed an own age advantage for the TA line-ups.

Are children less reliable at making visual identifications than adults? A review

The current paper reviews research that has investigated developmental differences in lineup identification. A wealth of studies have shown that children can be as accurate as adults when making a correct identification from a target present lineup (TP), however children are more inclined to choose and thereby make a false identification from a target absent (TA) lineup, as compared to adults. The literature reviewed, suggests that the disparity between childrens and adults performances on TA lineups is due to children being unable to resist the social demands to choose someone from a lineup and/or the need to give a positive response. Employing a silhouette within a lineup, that can be chosen if the target is not recognised, appears to be the most successful technique for reducing false identifications made by child witnesses. Including a silhouette as a part of a lineup, along with the lineup administrator being attired in casual clothing, rather than a uniform, are two simple measures that could make child witness identification evidence more reliable.

Own-age bias in video lineups: a comparison between children and adults

Abstract The present study investigated whether child (six–eight years of age) and adult witnesses (18–29 years of age) would exhibit an own-age bias when trying to identify targets from video lineups. One hundred and eighty-six participants viewed two filmed events that were identical, except one starred a child target and one a young adult. After a delay of two–three days each witness saw a lineup for the child and adult target. Children exhibited an own-age bias and were better at correctly identifying the own-age target from a target-present (TP) lineup and made more correct rejections for the own-age target-absent (TA) lineup. Adults however, showed a reversed own-age bias for the TP lineups as they made more correct identifications for the child target, but exhibited no bias for the TA lineups. The results suggest that differences in identification accuracy may be due to whether witness age and suspect age overlap.

The own-race bias in child and adolescent witnesses: Evidence from video line-ups

This study investigated the own-race bias in British school children using an eyewitness paradigm. Some 319 participants viewed films of two similar staged thefts, one that depicted a Caucasian culprit and the other an Asian culprit, and then after a delay of 2–3 days, viewed a line-up for each culprit. One hundred and seventy-six of the participants were Caucasian and 143 were Asian. There were also two age groups: 164 were aged 7–9 years and 152 were 12–14 years. There was a significant own-race bias for Caucasian participants from both age groups that resulted in more correct identifications for the own-race culprit from target present line-ups and more false identifications for the target absent line-ups. Asian participants from both age groups showed no own-race bias and performed equally accurately for culprits of both races. Measures of inter-racial contact were associated with correct responses for other-race targets and revealed that the majority of Caucasian participants in the current sample had very little contact with Asians, whereas the majority of Asian participants had high levels of contact with Caucasians.

Craniofacial Identification: Facial recognition from identification parades

Identification parades are one of the most common means of identifying a perpetrator of a crime and can be powerful evidence in securing convictions in criminal cases. In an identification parade (also known as a line-up) a suspect is placed amongst a number of similiar-looking people (foils) and the task for the witness is to either select the person they recognise as being the culprit, or state the culprit is not there. Unfortunately, witnesses do not always correctly identify the culprit from a line-up and in some cases innocent people are wrongly identified. This issue has been investigated by the Innocence project, who at the time of writing, have been involved in 251 exonerations based on DNA evidence in the USA. Of these cases approximately 75% of those convicted were cases of mistaken identity (Innocence Project at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/). Several similar organisations have developed worldwide such as the UK Innocent Network, the Australian Innocence Network and the Innocence Project New Zealand, all with the aim to overturn convictions of those who have been wrongfully imprisoned. One real life case of someone who was exonerated by the Innocent Project is Calvin Willis; he was wrongly accused of rape and served 22 years before DNA evidence proved he was innocent. Even though one of the police reports stated the victim did not see her attackers face, she was shown a line-up and said she was told to pick the man without the full beard. She later testified that she did not choose anyone, although the police said she picked Willis. Williss name only came into the investigation because the victims neighbours had mentioned Williss name when discussing who might have committed the crime. Even with all these flaws in the investigation the jury still convicted Willis and sentenced him to life (for more details of this case see Innocence Projects webpage at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/297.php). This illustrates how powerful eyewitness evidence can be in the courtroom, even when there are obvious flaws in the way it has been obtained. This chapter will explore a number of issues that can influence how accurately witnesses make decisions when viewing a line-up. These issues can be split into two separate strands: system variables and estimator variables (Wells, 1978). System variables are factors that are under control of the police conducting the parade, and include the method of foil selection and the identification format e.g. photo or video line-up. They also include whether the line-up presentation is sequential or simultaneous, instructions given to the witness, and whether they view a mugbook or make a composite prior to viewing a line-up. Estimator variables are factors associated with the witnesses and their view of the crime and are not under any control from the police or the judicial system. These include the witnesss age and eyesight, how long they saw the culprit for and also whether the culprit was the same age or ethnic background as the witness. We will examine how system and estimator variables can influence facial identification from line-ups, but first the method used to study the factors influencing eyewitness identification accuracy will be described.