Outcome and Process Parallelism in Mock Witness and Eyewitness Identification

模拟证人范例要求模拟证人--被告知对罪犯的口头描述，但从未见过他的“证人”--观看名单或照片，并试图选择嫌疑人。如果嫌疑人被偶然选中的次数比预期的要多，那么阵容或照片传播就会被认为是对嫌疑人有偏见，因此不公平。自1973年以来，模拟证人范式以各种形式被用于两个重要目的：作为评估证人识别研究中阵容和照片传播的公平性难度的基础，以及作为辩方在各种法律案件中对公平性进行事后评估的基础。模拟证人范式的基本有效性已被广泛假设，但从未具体评估或证明。实验室中的研究表明，当应用于顺序陈述时，模拟证人评估的结果并不遵循类似条件下目击者的预期模式。这些结果提出了一系列问题，包括：模拟证人和目击者鉴定决策的背景和过程有什么重要区别？这些差异是否导致两种类型证人的心理过程彼此背离--过程并行性的失败？社会背景和判断过程的不同是否会导致选择犯罪者的比率和准确性的对比？它们是否会导致对阵容或照片传播的公平性的不同判断？这些似乎都是重要的问题。在进程和结果不同并导致不同结果的程度上，模拟证人范式受到质疑。如果它被宣布无效，我们将只剩下非常繁琐的方法来评估研究和法律程序中的阵容/照片传播公平性。本研究采用的方法是以拍摄的犯罪现场为基础，观察者观看条件的质量各不相同，并允许使用多个“犯罪者”。试点研究校准了犯罪录像带中观看条件的质量，并校准了不同程度的光传播偏差。“罪犯”的照片和那些将被用作陪衬的照片来自埃尔帕索警察局的程序和文件。从历史上看，来自目击者的数据侧重于证人阵容/照片扩散选择的选择、准确性和其他分类，而从模拟证人获得的数据一直被用来估计对被告的偏见以及在证人阵容/照片扩散中使用的箔片的适当性。这项调查能够检验目击者和模拟证人的两组因变量，为检验结果的平行性提供了共同的基础。看过犯罪录像带的目击者提供了对罪犯的口头描述。模拟证人将与每一名目击者捆绑在一起，并将得到目击者的口头描述，从而保留两组证人的差异范围，并为比较结果提供更有力的基础。本研究将明确适合模拟证人评估的条件，从而将扎实的基础研究与较高的应用潜力结合起来。

The Mock witness Paradigm asks mock witnesses - `witnesses` who have been given a verbal description of an offender but who have never seen him - to view a lineup or photospread and try to choose the suspect. If the suspect is chosen more often than expected by chance, the lineup or photospread is said to be biased towards the suspect, and thus unfair. Since 1973 the Mock Witness Paradigm has been used in various forms for two important purposes: as the basis for evaluation of the difficulty of the fairness of lineups and photospreads in studies of eyewitness identification, and as the basis for post hoc assessments of fairness by the defense in a variety of legal cases. The basic validity of the mock witness paradigm has been widely assumed but never specifically evaluated or demonstrated. Studies in the laboratory demonstrate that when applied to sequential presentations, the outcomes of mock witness evaluation do not follow the pattern expected of eyewitnesses under similar conditions. These results raise a series of questions including the following: What are the important differences between mock witness and eyewitness identification decision making contexts and processes? Do these differences lead the psychological processes in the two types of witnesses to diverge from each other - a failure of process parallelism? Do differences in social contexts and judgment processes lead to contrasts in the rates and accuracy of choosing the offender? And do they result in contrasting judgments of the fairness of lineups or photospreads? These seem to be important questions. To the extent processes and outcomes differ and lead to different outcomes the mock witness paradigm is called into question. If it is invalidated we would be left with only very cumbersome ways to evaluate lineup/photospread fairness in research and in the legal process. The methodology employed in this study is based on videotaped crime scenes, varying in the quality of the viewing conditions for the observer, and providing for the use of multiple `offenders`. Pilot studies calibrate the quality of the viewing conditions in the videotaped crime and calibrate varying levels of photospread bias. Photographs of the `offenders` and those to be used as foils come from the procedures and files of the El Paso Police Department. Historically, data from eyewitnesses has focused on choosing, accuracy and other classifications of the witness's lineup/photospread choice, while data taken from mock witnesses has been used in the aggregate to estimate the bias toward the defendant and the appropriateness of the foils employed in the lineup/photospread. This investigation is in a position to examine both sets of dependent variables for eyewitnesses and mock witnesses, providing a common basis for examining outcome parallelism. Witnesses who have viewed the videotaped crime provide a verbal description of the offender. A mock witness will be yoked with each eyewitness and will be given the eyewitness's verbal description, thereby preserving the range of variation in both sets of witnesses and providing a stronger basis for comparison of outcomes. This research will clarify the conditions which are appropriate for mock witness evaluation and thus combine solid basic research with high potential for application.