» Articles » PMID: 35133492

Diagnosing Eyewitness Identifications with Reaction Time-based Concealed Information Test: the Effect of Observation Time

Overview
Journal Psychol Res
Specialty Psychology
Date 2022 Feb 8
PMID 35133492
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Eyewitness identification procedures rely heavily on explicit identification from lineups. Lineups have been criticized because they have a considerable error rate. We tested the potential of implicit identifications in a Concealed Information Test (CIT) as an alternative. Previous experiments have suggested that implicit identification procedures might be suited when viewing conditions were favorable. In two experiments, mock eyewitnesses (Ns = 94, 509) witnessed a videotaped mock theft with longer or shorter observation time. We derived eyewitness identifications either implicitly from CIT reaction times or explicitly from simultaneous photo lineups. In Experiment 2, we also manipulated perpetrator presence. In both experiments, the perpetrator-present CIT showed capacity to diagnose face recognition, with large effect sizes (d = 0.85 [0.51; 1.18]; d = 0.74 [0.52; 0.96]), as expected. Unexpectedly, no moderation by observation time was found. In line with our hypothesis, no CIT effect emerged in the perpetrator-absent condition, indicating the absence of recognition (d = 0.02 [- 0.17; 0.20]). We found no compelling evidence that one method would outperform the other. This work adds to accumulating evidence that suggests that, under favorable viewing conditions and replication provided, the RT-CIT might be diagnostic of facial recognition, for example when witnesses are hesitant of making an explicit identification. Future work might investigate conditions that affect performance in one, but not the other identification method.

Citing Articles

Taylor Swift does not boost face recognition in reaction time-based Concealed Information Test: investigating target-familiarity effects.

Kohn Lukic L, Mock N, Verschuere B, Sauerland M Psychol Res. 2024; 88(8):2292-2302.

PMID: 39230760 PMC: 11522165. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-024-02003-1.


Diagnosing eyewitness identifications with reaction time‑based Concealed Information Test: the effect of viewpoint congruency between test and encoding.

Sauerland M, Geven L, Bastiaens A, Verschuere B Psychol Res. 2023; 88(2):639-651.

PMID: 37477730 PMC: 10858071. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-023-01857-1.

References
1.
Suchotzki K, De Houwer J, Kleinberg B, Verschuere B . Using more different and more familiar targets improves the detection of concealed information. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018; 185:65-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.01.010. View

2.
Kleinberg B, Verschuere B . Memory detection 2.0: the first web-based memory detection test. PLoS One. 2015; 10(4):e0118715. PMC: 4395266. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118715. View

3.
Georgiadou K, Chronos A, Verschuere B, Sauerland M . Reaction time-based Concealed Information Test in eyewitness identification is moderated by picture similarity but not eyewitness cooperation. Psychol Res. 2019; 86(7):2278-2288. PMC: 9470627. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-018-1139-8. View

4.
Suchotzki K, Verschuere B, Peth J, Crombez G, Gamer M . Manipulating item proportion and deception reveals crucial dissociation between behavioral, autonomic, and neural indices of concealed information. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014; 36(2):427-39. PMC: 6869839. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.22637. View

5.
Sauerland M, Wolfs A, Crans S, Verschuere B . Testing a potential alternative to traditional identification procedures: Reaction time-based concealed information test does not work for lineups with cooperative witnesses. Psychol Res. 2017; 83(6):1210-1222. PMC: 6647190. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-017-0948-5. View