Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

Appearance Change Instructions (ACI) are a component of the instructions given to witnesses before they are shown a photographic lineup or a live line-up. ACI serves as a reminder to the eyewitness that the culprit may not appear in the line-up exactly as he or she did at the time of the crime. Since the ACI was introduced by the Department of Justice in 1999 (Technical Working Group, 1999), few studies have examined its effectiveness and none have reported an increase in accurate identifications (hits; the probability of accurately identifying an old face from a target present lineup) as a result of ACI (Porter et al., 2014; Molinaro et al., 2013; Charman & Wells 2006). In fact, all the ACI studies reported adverse effects of ACI with ACI instructions resulting in increased misidentifications (false alarms). Additionally, the same studies have also indicated that people who receive lineup instructions with ACI tend to be overconfident about their identifications. There are two possible accounts for the increased false alarms with ACI instructions. First, none of the ACI studies reflect actual appearance changes in the photographs in the lineups. If the ACI is to help witnesses overcome potential changes in appearance during the identification process, an absence of any apparent changes in appearance could be leading, masking any potential benefits of the ACI. This phenomenon is reflected in the increase in false alarms with ACI administration compared to no ACI administrations (Porter et al., 2014; Molinaro et al., 2013; Charman & Wells 2006). Second, some ACIs are very extensive, possibly suggestive of an exaggerated change in appearance that again, is not apparent to the eyewitness. Further, some ACI instructions focus on very specific facial characteristics that do not change like eyes, nose, ears, and mouth (e.g., Porter et al, 2014) which encourage specific and not holistic processing of faces. However, research predominantly suggests that facial processing is holistic, and not feature specific. The present study addresses the two aforementioned limitations in previous literature by (1) assessing the effectiveness of ACIs for suspects with distinctive features and (2) utilizing both brief and extensive versions of ACI. The use of suspects with distinctive features presents witnesses with a noticeable change in the appearance of the suspect between the crime and the line-up photos in cases where the distinctive feature is concealed in the lineup, compared to cases where the distinctive feature is replicated on other members in the lineup. Further, distinctive features can be divided into two subsets based on the probability of change between the crime and the line-up photos: distinctive features that are more likely to change in the short-term, such as bruises, piercings, and facial hair, and those that are unlikely to change in the short-term, such as tattoos, scars, and moles. The use of extensive and brief versions of ACI allows for an assessment of whether extensive ACIs are more suggestive of an exaggerated change in appearance leading to an increase in false alarms. To effectively assess these variables, this study involves two experiments. Experiment 1 includes faces with distinctive features that are likely to change over time and Experiment 2 includes faces with distinctive features that are unlikely to change over time. In both experiments, participants will receive either the brief ACI, extensive ACI or no ACI lineup instructions. All participants will be presented with 4 lineups, one for each distinctive feature (Exp 1: bruise, piercing, and facial hair; Exp 2: scar, tattoo, and mole) and one for a face with no distinctive features. Participants will also be asked to provide confidence ratings for their identification.