Automaticity and Eyewitness Accuracy: a 10- to 12-second Rule for Distinguishing Accurate from Inaccurate Positive Identifications
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Eyewitness researchers have shown that witnesses accurately choosing the culprit out of a lineup reach their decisions more quickly than those erroneously choosing an innocent individual. However, this research is silent regarding how quickly or slowly witnesses must be, in absolute terms, to indicate that they are accurate or inaccurate. Across 4 studies, the authors discovered that a time boundary of roughly 10 to 12 s best differentiated accurate from inaccurate positive identifications. Witnesses making their identification faster than 10 to 12 s were nearly 90% accurate; those taking longer were roughly 50% accurate. This finding is consistent with previous research showing that accurate witnesses are more likely than inaccurate witnesses to reach their decisions automatically, that is, quickly, without conscious thought or effort.
Zhang M, Sauerland M, Sagana A Mem Cognit. 2025; .
PMID: 40072820 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-025-01699-9.
Price H, Fitzgerald R PLoS One. 2024; 19(9):e0308757.
PMID: 39292693 PMC: 11410227. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308757.
Sauerland M, Tupper N, Iannuzzi M, van Amelsvoort A PLoS One. 2023; 18(4):e0284205.
PMID: 37040385 PMC: 10089327. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284205.
Lineup identification in young and older witnesses: does describing the criminal help or hinder?.
Holdstock J, Dalton P, May K, Boogert S, Mickes L Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022; 7(1):51.
PMID: 35713818 PMC: 9206054. DOI: 10.1186/s41235-022-00399-1.
Decision time and confidence predict choosers' identification performance in photographic showups.
Sauerland M, Sagana A, Sporer S, Wixted J PLoS One. 2018; 13(1):e0190416.
PMID: 29346394 PMC: 5773080. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190416.