What We Know Now: The Evanston Illinois Field Lineups
A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program's comparison of non-blind simultaneous to dou...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Law and human behavior 2011-02, Vol.35 (1), p.1-12 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 12 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | Law and human behavior |
| container_volume | 35 |
| creator | Steblay, Nancy K |
| description | A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program's comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions. For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup conditions. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_902078287</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>41488968</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>41488968</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a512t-eb3fcc3f2602be215f3e2c74293854baf1786c80d550594825041cbe2f20a12a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0E1P3DAQBmCrApUFKvXaQ9GqF8QhMOOPeHxEqHyoq_ZSRG-WY5yyq2yy2IkQ_x6vQhfEgZ4seZ4Ze17GviAcI4A-SQhGmwLAFIaDLvQHNkGlRVGW-GeLTQBlvhSgd9huSgvIkEB9ZDscUGut5IR9vrlz_fQmTH-03cP0Z_ewz7Zr16Tw6fncY9fn33-fXRazXxdXZ6ezwinkfREqUXsval4CrwJHVYvAvZbcCFKycjVqKj3BrVKgjCSuQKLPsubgkDuxxw7HuavY3Q8h9XY5Tz40jWtDNyRrIG9EnPR_JUkqiQhElt_eyEU3xDavYQ3KjIDke4ikNmSU4hnhiHzsUoqhtqs4X7r4aBHsOns7Zm9zpHadvV3_8-B58FAtw-2m41_YGfARpFxq_4b48vJ7U7-OTYvUd3EzVKIkMiXl-tFYdytnV-nRu9jPfROSH2IMbW-bu8oKZdHiy-pv7Wv0BN9Hrk8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>847989552</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What We Know Now: The Evanston Illinois Field Lineups</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Steblay, Nancy K</creator><contributor>Cutler, Brian</contributor><creatorcontrib>Steblay, Nancy K ; Cutler, Brian</creatorcontrib><description>A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program's comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions. For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup conditions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-7307</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-661X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20177754</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LHBEDM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Analysis ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Choice Behavior ; Cities ; Community and Environmental Psychology ; Crime Victims ; Criminal Law - methods ; Criminals ; Criminology and Criminal Justice ; Double-Blind Method ; Experiments ; Eyewitness identification ; Female ; Field study ; Freedom of information ; Freedom of Information Act ; Human ; Human behavior ; Humans ; Illinois ; Laboratories ; Law and Psychology ; Law enforcement ; Laws ; Lawsuits ; Litigation ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Offenders ; Original Article ; Peer review ; Personality and Social Psychology ; Photo lineups ; Pilot projects ; Police ; Police lineups ; Psychology ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Research methodology ; Stranger relations ; Studies ; Suspect identification ; United States of America ; Visual Perception ; Witnesses ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Law and human behavior, 2011-02, Vol.35 (1), p.1-12</ispartof><rights>2011 American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2011 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2011 American Psychology-Law Society / Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><rights>American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2010</rights><rights>American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2011</rights><rights>2010, American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a512t-eb3fcc3f2602be215f3e2c74293854baf1786c80d550594825041cbe2f20a12a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a512t-eb3fcc3f2602be215f3e2c74293854baf1786c80d550594825041cbe2f20a12a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,33774,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20177754$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Cutler, Brian</contributor><creatorcontrib>Steblay, Nancy K</creatorcontrib><title>What We Know Now: The Evanston Illinois Field Lineups</title><title>Law and human behavior</title><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><description>A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program's comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions. For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup conditions.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Choice Behavior</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Community and Environmental Psychology</subject><subject>Crime Victims</subject><subject>Criminal Law - methods</subject><subject>Criminals</subject><subject>Criminology and Criminal Justice</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Eyewitness identification</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Field study</subject><subject>Freedom of information</subject><subject>Freedom of Information Act</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Human behavior</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Illinois</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Law and Psychology</subject><subject>Law enforcement</subject><subject>Laws</subject><subject>Lawsuits</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Offenders</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Peer review</subject><subject>Personality and Social Psychology</subject><subject>Photo lineups</subject><subject>Pilot projects</subject><subject>Police</subject><subject>Police lineups</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Recognition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Stranger relations</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Suspect identification</subject><subject>United States of America</subject><subject>Visual Perception</subject><subject>Witnesses</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0147-7307</issn><issn>1573-661X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0E1P3DAQBmCrApUFKvXaQ9GqF8QhMOOPeHxEqHyoq_ZSRG-WY5yyq2yy2IkQ_x6vQhfEgZ4seZ4Ze17GviAcI4A-SQhGmwLAFIaDLvQHNkGlRVGW-GeLTQBlvhSgd9huSgvIkEB9ZDscUGut5IR9vrlz_fQmTH-03cP0Z_ewz7Zr16Tw6fncY9fn33-fXRazXxdXZ6ezwinkfREqUXsval4CrwJHVYvAvZbcCFKycjVqKj3BrVKgjCSuQKLPsubgkDuxxw7HuavY3Q8h9XY5Tz40jWtDNyRrIG9EnPR_JUkqiQhElt_eyEU3xDavYQ3KjIDke4ikNmSU4hnhiHzsUoqhtqs4X7r4aBHsOns7Zm9zpHadvV3_8-B58FAtw-2m41_YGfARpFxq_4b48vJ7U7-OTYvUd3EzVKIkMiXl-tFYdytnV-nRu9jPfROSH2IMbW-bu8oKZdHiy-pv7Wv0BN9Hrk8</recordid><startdate>20110201</startdate><enddate>20110201</enddate><creator>Steblay, Nancy K</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Science+Business Media</general><general>Springer US</general><general>American Psychological Law Society</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110201</creationdate><title>What We Know Now</title><author>Steblay, Nancy K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a512t-eb3fcc3f2602be215f3e2c74293854baf1786c80d550594825041cbe2f20a12a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Choice Behavior</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Community and Environmental Psychology</topic><topic>Crime Victims</topic><topic>Criminal Law - methods</topic><topic>Criminals</topic><topic>Criminology and Criminal Justice</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Eyewitness identification</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Field study</topic><topic>Freedom of information</topic><topic>Freedom of Information Act</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Human behavior</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Illinois</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Law and Psychology</topic><topic>Law enforcement</topic><topic>Laws</topic><topic>Lawsuits</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Offenders</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Peer review</topic><topic>Personality and Social Psychology</topic><topic>Photo lineups</topic><topic>Pilot projects</topic><topic>Police</topic><topic>Police lineups</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Recognition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Stranger relations</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Suspect identification</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>Visual Perception</topic><topic>Witnesses</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Steblay, Nancy K</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Law and human behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Steblay, Nancy K</au><au>Cutler, Brian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What We Know Now: The Evanston Illinois Field Lineups</atitle><jtitle>Law and human behavior</jtitle><stitle>Law Hum Behav</stitle><addtitle>Law Hum Behav</addtitle><date>2011-02-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>12</epage><pages>1-12</pages><issn>0147-7307</issn><eissn>1573-661X</eissn><coden>LHBEDM</coden><abstract>A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit secured 100 eyewitness identification reports from Evanston, Illinois, one of three cities of the Illinois Pilot Program. The files provide empirical evidence regarding three methodological aspects of the Program's comparison of non-blind simultaneous to double-blind sequential lineups. (1) A-priori differences existed between lineup conditions. For example, the simultaneous non-blind lineup condition was more likely to involve witnesses who had already identified the suspect in a previous lineup or who knew the offender (non-stranger identifications), and this condition also entailed shorter delays between event and lineup. (2) Verbatim eyewitness comments were recorded more often in double-blind sequential than in non-blind simultaneous lineup reports (83% vs. 39%). (3) Effective lineup structure was used equally in the two lineup conditions.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>20177754</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0147-7307 |
| ispartof | Law and human behavior, 2011-02, Vol.35 (1), p.1-12 |
| issn | 0147-7307 1573-661X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_902078287 |
| source | MEDLINE; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Business Source Complete; Sociological Abstracts; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Analysis Behavioral Science and Psychology Choice Behavior Cities Community and Environmental Psychology Crime Victims Criminal Law - methods Criminals Criminology and Criminal Justice Double-Blind Method Experiments Eyewitness identification Female Field study Freedom of information Freedom of Information Act Human Human behavior Humans Illinois Laboratories Law and Psychology Law enforcement Laws Lawsuits Litigation Male Middle Aged Offenders Original Article Peer review Personality and Social Psychology Photo lineups Pilot projects Police Police lineups Psychology Recognition (Psychology) Research methodology Stranger relations Studies Suspect identification United States of America Visual Perception Witnesses Young Adult |
| title | What We Know Now: The Evanston Illinois Field Lineups |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T08%3A57%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20We%20Know%20Now:%20The%20Evanston%20Illinois%20Field%20Lineups&rft.jtitle=Law%20and%20human%20behavior&rft.au=Steblay,%20Nancy%20K&rft.date=2011-02-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=12&rft.pages=1-12&rft.issn=0147-7307&rft.eissn=1573-661X&rft.coden=LHBEDM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10979-009-9207-7&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E41488968%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=847989552&rft_id=info:pmid/20177754&rft_jstor_id=41488968&rfr_iscdi=true |